Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel. Click here to request a subscription.
Trusted by the judiciary, government lawyers, prosecutors, and many leading counsel.
Click here to request a subscription.
Appellant’s appeal against severe sentencing for violent property attack dismissed
|
or click here to request site subscription to search and view all judgments |
The Court of Appeal dismisses appeal and upholds the original High Court's decision to impose a substantial concurrent sentence on an individual involved in a premeditated and violent attack on security personnel lawfully securing a repossessed property. The appellant's sentence included 15 years for false imprisonment and 13 years for aggravated burglary, among other charges. The court found no error in principle, affirming the necessity for a strong deterrent against such organised and brutal conduct, and recognising the gravity of the offences which warranted the maximum penalties imposed.
- Court of Appeal - High Court - False imprisonment - Aggravated burglary - Assault causing harm - Arson - Violent disorder - Criminal damage - Animal cruelty - Non-Fatal Offences Against the Person Act, 1997 - Criminal Justice (Theft and Fraud Offences) Act, 2001 - Criminal Damage Act, 1991 - Criminal Justice (Public Order) Act, 1994 - Joint enterprise - Sentencing principles - Mitigation - Rehabilitation - Deterrence - Proportionality - Victim impact statement - Premeditation - Concurrent sentence
Note: This is intended to be a fair and accurate report of a decision made public by a court of law. Any errors should be notified to the editor and will be dealt with accordingly.
