AG -v- Hogg 22 Nov-2011 [2011] JRC 223 (22 November 2011)

AG -v- Hogg 22 Nov-2011 [2011] JRC 223 (22 November 2011)

The appropriate sentence is three years' imprisonment, as the aggravating factors, particularly the commission of the offence while on licence for a similar offence, outweigh the mitigating circumstances.

Citation
[2011] JRC 223
Parties
Prosecutor: Attorney General; Defendant: Unnamed Defendant
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
22 November 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
convicted and sentenced
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Aggravating Factors, Mitigating Circumstances, Joint Enterprise, Recidivism
Criminal Law Sentencing Aggravating Factors Mitigating Circumstances Joint Enterprise Recidivism

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Unnamed Defendant

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 What is the appropriate sentence for the defendant given the aggravating and mitigating factors?
  2. 2 Does the fact that the offence was committed while on licence for a similar offence aggravate the sentence?

Ratio Decidendi

The appropriate sentence is three years' imprisonment, as the aggravating factors, particularly the commission of the offence while on licence for a similar offence, outweigh the mitigating circumstances.

Court Disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • The defendant is sentenced to three years' imprisonment.