AG v Reeves [2013] JRC 119 (19 June 2013)

AG v Reeves [2013] JRC 119 (19 June 2013)

Given the scale of dishonesty, the financial and emotional harm caused, and despite mitigation, imprisonment is the only appropriate sentence.

Citation
[2013] JRC 119
Parties
Defendant: Unknown Defendant; Prosecution: Crown
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
19 June 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
convicted
Legal Topics
Fraud, Sentencing, Mitigation
Criminal Law Fraud Sentencing Mitigation

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

Parties

Unknown Defendant

Defendant

Crown

Prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 fraudulent misrepresentation
  2. 2 dishonesty
  3. 3 sentencing principles

Ratio Decidendi

Given the scale of dishonesty, the financial and emotional harm caused, and despite mitigation, imprisonment is the only appropriate sentence.

Court Disposition

convicted

Orders

  • 3½ years' imprisonment concurrent on each count