Att. Gen v Margeson [1975] JJ 217 (19 February 1975)

Att. Gen v Margeson [1975] JJ 217 (19 February 1975)

Interference with sentence is justified where there is unjustified disparity between co-accused or where the character, background of the appellant, and severity of the offences so warrant.

Citation
[1975] JJ 217
Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent: Margeson
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
19 February 1975
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal
Outcome
sentence may be interfered with in appropriate circumstances
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Disparity Between Co Accused, Grounds for Appellate Interference
Criminal Law Sentencing Disparity Between Co Accused Grounds for Appellate Interference

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 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Margeson

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether disparity between sentences of co-accused justifies appellate interference
  2. 2 Whether character, background, and severity of offences warrant sentence adjustment

Ratio Decidendi

Interference with sentence is justified where there is unjustified disparity between co-accused or where the character, background of the appellant, and severity of the offences so warrant.

Court Disposition

sentence may be interfered with in appropriate circumstances