AG -v- Richomme [2017] JRC 109 (14 July 2017)

AG -v- Richomme [2017] JRC 109 (14 July 2017)

The defendant's robbery was violent but less so than cases cited by the prosecution; a 3-year sentence is appropriate. The harassment was serious, involving threats and persistent abuse, warranting a consecutive 1-year sentence. A 6-year restraining order is justified to protect the former partner and her son.

Citation
[2017] JRC 109
Parties
Prosecution: The Crown; Defendant: Defendant; Victim: Former Partner; Victim: Victim (robbery)
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
14 July 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
convicted and sentenced
Legal Topics
Robbery, Harassment, Sentencing, Restraining Order
Criminal Law Robbery Harassment Sentencing Restraining Order

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

Parties

The Crown

Prosecution

Defendant

Defendant

Former Partner

Victim

Victim (robbery)

Victim

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate sentence for robbery
  2. 2 Appropriate sentence for harassment
  3. 3 Justification and terms of restraining order

Ratio Decidendi

The defendant's robbery was violent but less so than cases cited by the prosecution; a 3-year sentence is appropriate. The harassment was serious, involving threats and persistent abuse, warranting a consecutive 1-year sentence. A 6-year restraining order is justified to protect the former partner and her son.

Court Disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • 3 years' imprisonment for robbery
  • 1 year's imprisonment for harassment, consecutive