Fogg v Att. Gen. [1991] JLR 31 (08 April 1991)

Fogg v Att. Gen. [1991] JLR 31 (08 April 1991)

The Royal Court's discretion to increase the conclusions of the Crown does not, by itself, constitute a ground for allowing an appeal against sentence, but it does justify careful scrutiny on further appeal.

Citation
[1991] JLR 31
Parties
Appellant: Fogg; Respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
08 April 1991
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Sentence, Royal Court Discretion, Crown Conclusions
Criminal Law Appeal Against Sentence Royal Court Discretion Crown Conclusions

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 1 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fogg

Appellant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the Royal Court's discretion to increase conclusions of the Crown is a ground for allowing an appeal against sentence

Ratio Decidendi

The Royal Court's discretion to increase the conclusions of the Crown does not, by itself, constitute a ground for allowing an appeal against sentence, but it does justify careful scrutiny on further appeal.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed