In Court
| Published date | 01 September 1987 |
| Date | 01 September 1987 |
| DOI | 10.1177/026455058703400310 |
| Subject Matter | Articles |
Interpreting S 1 (4) CJA ’82
In R
v ROBERTS (Cnm LR, August 1987) the Court of
Appeal reviewed an 18 months custody term imposed
on an eighteen year old male with no previous
convictions for three offences of burglary and 12
similar TICs, including dwelling houses, though
always when unoccupied and not at mght The SER had
described him as a ‘normally well adjusted young man
who had gone off the rails’ and recommended a non-
custodial penalty
Decasion In interpreting S 1 (4) CJA 1982, the statutory
criterion of
IN COURT
bemg ’so senous that a non-custodial
penalty could not be justified’ must be applied to each
offence individually rather than to the aggregated
gravity of all the offences together Here, the gravity of
any one burglary could not be said to make a non-
Probation Records and Privilege
custodial penalty unjustifiable However, m regard to
In RE M (Family Law November 1986) Solicitors
the criterion of a custodial sentence being ’necessary
had wished to obtam information from probation
for the protection of the public’, it was necessary to
consider this m the
records whether the father
light of the defendant’s whole
m
Wardship proceedmgs
criminal behaviour Fifteen burglaries or attempted
had been offered medical treatment m
pnson m
respect
burglaries certainly justified the conclusion that the
of sexual abuse of a child The Probation Service had
protection of the public required immediate custody
refused the request on grounds that the matenal was out
But sound sentencmg policy required a first custodial
of date and privileged The probation officer had then
sentence to be kept as short as possible, and so mne
been sub-poenaed to attend and produce the record The
months YC
would be substituted
mformation was then obtamed under exarrunation The
Probation Officer as Prosecutor
Probation Service challenged the vahdity of the wnt
R v LIVERPOOL STIPENDIARY MAGISTRATE 2x p
The Family Division held that probation records
Atklnson (The Times May 30 1987)...
To continue reading
Request your trial