AG v Marett and Riddell [2004] JRC 166 (17 September 2004)

AG v Marett and Riddell [2004] JRC 166 (17 September 2004)

Given the seriousness and separation of the offences, and Marett's record, concurrent and consecutive sentences totaling 30 months' imprisonment and a 5-year driving disqualification are appropriate. Riddell's subservient role and cooperation justify probation and a 12-month driving disqualification.

Citation
[2004] JRC 166
Parties
Defendant: Riddell; Defendant: Marett; Prosecutor: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
17 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
conviction and sentencing
Legal Topics
Theft, Burglary, Sentencing, Driving Disqualification, Totality Principle
Criminal Law Theft Burglary Sentencing Driving Disqualification Totality Principle

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

Parties

Riddell

Defendant

Marett

Defendant

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate sentencing for theft, burglary, and related offences
  2. 2 Application of the totality principle in sentencing
  3. 3 Consideration of defendant's role and cooperation

Ratio Decidendi

Given the seriousness and separation of the offences, and Marett's record, concurrent and consecutive sentences totaling 30 months' imprisonment and a 5-year driving disqualification are appropriate. Riddell's subservient role and cooperation justify probation and a 12-month driving disqualification.

Court Disposition

conviction and sentencing

Orders

  • Riddell: 12 months probation, 12 months driving disqualification
  • Marett: 30 months imprisonment (counts 1-5 concurrent, count 6 consecutive), 5 years driving disqualification on counts 1-5