Hunt v AG [2003] JCA 128 (18 July 2003)

Hunt v AG [2003] JCA 128 (18 July 2003)

The Royal Court properly considered all relevant mitigation and the sentence imposed was appropriate; there was no basis for finding the sentence manifestly excessive or for appellate interference.

Citation
[2003] JCA 128
Parties
Appellant: John Stanley Michael Hunt; Respondent: The Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
18 July 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
application for leave to appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Drug Offences, Mitigation, Appeals
Criminal Law Sentencing Drug Offences Mitigation Appeals

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

John Stanley Michael Hunt

Appellant

The Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of 7 years' imprisonment was manifestly excessive given the mitigation available.

Ratio Decidendi

The Royal Court properly considered all relevant mitigation and the sentence imposed was appropriate; there was no basis for finding the sentence manifestly excessive or for appellate interference.

Court Disposition

application for leave to appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Application for leave to appeal against sentence is dismissed.
  • Direction given under Article 35(4)(b).