1998/150 - Williams v AG [1998] UR 150 (13 July 1998)

The appellant was not given a proper opportunity to speak in mitigation, which is a fundamental right; therefore, the fine is reduced to avoid a sense of injustice.

Citation: [1998] UR 150
Parties: Appellant: Stephen Charles Williams; Respondent: Relief Magistrate
Jurisdiction: Jersey
Judgment Date: 13 July 1998
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome: appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics: Sentencing, Mitigation, Driving Under the Influence

Criminal Law Road Traffic Law Sentencing Mitigation Driving Under the Influence

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4

Parties

Stephen Charles Williams

Appellant

Relief Magistrate

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

1 Whether the appellant was given an opportunity to speak in mitigation before sentence was imposed
2 Whether the fine imposed was excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The appellant was not given a proper opportunity to speak in mitigation, which is a fundamental right; therefore, the fine is reduced to avoid a sense of injustice.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

Fine of £800 quashed and substituted with a fine of £500 to be paid at £20 per week