AG v Dorney [2011] JRC 142 (22 July 2011)

AG v Dorney [2011] JRC 142 (22 July 2011)

The court determined that while the offence warranted a custodial sentence, the defendant's time already served on remand, current employment, and family support justified suspending the sentence to avoid loss of employment and potential recidivism.

Citation
[2011] JRC 142
Parties
Prosecutor: Attorney General; Defendant: Unnamed Defendant
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
22 July 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
suspended custodial sentence and exclusion order imposed
Legal Topics
Public Violence, Sentencing, Suspended Sentence, Exclusion Order
Criminal Law Public Violence Sentencing Suspended Sentence Exclusion Order

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

Parties

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Unnamed Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate sentence for public violence in a public house
  2. 2 Whether immediate custodial sentence is warranted
  3. 3 Imposition of exclusion order

Ratio Decidendi

The court determined that while the offence warranted a custodial sentence, the defendant's time already served on remand, current employment, and family support justified suspending the sentence to avoid loss of employment and potential recidivism.

Court Disposition

suspended custodial sentence and exclusion order imposed

Orders

  • 9 months' imprisonment suspended for 2 years
  • Exclusion Order from 1st, 6th, and 7th category premises for 2 years