AG v Yeaman [2001] JRC 82 (06 April 2001)

AG v Yeaman [2001] JRC 82 (06 April 2001)

For public order offences committed under the influence of alcohol, a fine is generally more appropriate than a binding over order, and the amount should reflect the seriousness of the offence and the defendant's means.

Citation
[2001] JRC 82
Parties
Defendant: Yeaman; Prosecution: Crown
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
06 April 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
convicted and fined
Legal Topics
Public Order Offence, Sentencing, Binding Over Order, Fine
Criminal Law Public Order Offence Sentencing Binding Over Order Fine

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 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Yeaman

Defendant

Crown

Prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriateness of binding over order versus fine for public order offences committed under influence of alcohol
  2. 2 Adequacy of fine amount for such offences

Ratio Decidendi

For public order offences committed under the influence of alcohol, a fine is generally more appropriate than a binding over order, and the amount should reflect the seriousness of the offence and the defendant's means.

Court Disposition

convicted and fined

Orders

  • Yeaman is fined £50 or 1 week's imprisonment in default of payment.