B v AG [2002] UR 232 (06 November 2002)

B v AG [2002] UR 232 (06 November 2002)

The Youth Court should have expressly stated its reasons under Article 4(2)(a) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 1994, as the appellant had a history of failure to respond to non-custodial penalties. However, given the appellant's age, first-time custody, and inadequate custodial facilities, the...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2002] UR 232
Parties
Appellant: B; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
06 November 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence From Youth Court
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing of Young Offenders, Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentences, Adequacy of Custodial Facilities, Requirements Under Criminal Justice (young Offenders) (jersey) Law 1994
Criminal Law Youth Justice Sentencing of Young Offenders Concurrent Vs Consecutive Sentences Adequacy of Custodial Facilities Requirements Under Criminal Justice (young Offenders) (jersey) Law 1994

Source-derived case record

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

B

Appellant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence From Youth Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of 5 ½ months' Youth Detention was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the Youth Court complied with Article 4 of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 1994
  3. 3 Whether sentences should have been concurrent rather than consecutive

Ratio Decidendi

The Youth Court should have expressly stated its reasons under Article 4(2)(a) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 1994, as the appellant had a history of failure to respond to non-custodial penalties. However, given the appellant's age, first-time custody, and inadequate custodial facilities, the sentences should run concurrently, reducing the total period of Youth Detention to four months.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Sentences of Youth Detention to run concurrently, reducing total detention to four months.
  • Appellant to be subject to supervision upon release.