Wright v Att. Gen. [1999] JLR_Note 15a (12 July 1999)
The court held that disparity in sentencing must be justified by relevant differences in circumstances; unjustified disparity is grounds for appellate intervention.
- Parties
- Applicant: Wright; Respondent: Attorney General
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Judgment Date
- 12 July 1999
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Sentence Review
- Outcome
- unknown
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Sentence Disparity
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 Party arguments 2
Parties
Wright
Applicant
Attorney General
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentence Review
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether there was an unjustified disparity between sentences imposed
Ratio Decidendi
The court held that disparity in sentencing must be justified by relevant differences in circumstances; unjustified disparity is grounds for appellate intervention.
Court Disposition
unknown
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment