Congdon v AG [2002] JRC 38 (12 February 2002)

Congdon v AG [2002] JRC 38 (12 February 2002)

There are no exceptional circumstances to justify a non-custodial sentence; gambling addiction does not materially add to mitigation; the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive or wrong in principle.

Citation
[2002] JRC 38
Parties
Applicant: Applicant; Respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
12 February 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Forgery, Fraudulent Conversion, Breach of Trust, Mitigation, Sentencing
Criminal Law Forgery Fraudulent Conversion Breach of Trust Mitigation Sentencing

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 17 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Applicant

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether exceptional circumstances exist to justify a non-custodial sentence
  2. 2 Whether gambling addiction is a mitigating factor
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

There are no exceptional circumstances to justify a non-custodial sentence; gambling addiction does not materially add to mitigation; the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive or wrong in principle.

Court Disposition

leave to appeal refused