Pye v Leeds Youth Court
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | MR JUSTICE BEAN,LORD JUSTICE MAURICE KAY |
| Judgment Date | 03 October 2006 |
| Neutral Citation | [2006] EWHC 2527 (Admin) |
| Date | 03 October 2006 |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Docket Number | CO/4844/2006 |
[2006] EWHC 2527 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
DIVISIONAL COURT
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
Lord Justice Maurice Kay
Mr Justice Bean
CO/4844/2006
MR H SOUTHEY (instructed by Henry Hyams & Co) appeared on behalf of the CLAIMANT
The DEFENDANT did not attend and was not represented
The question raised in this appeal by way of case stated is whether a 17 year old convicted of criminal damage to the value of less than £5,000 is liable to a custodial sentence in the Youth Court. In my view, the answer is that he is not.
The appellant was born on 20th April 1988. On 23rd February 2006 he appeared before District Judge Kitson in the Leeds Youth Court for sentence on two charges: one of theft, one of criminal damage. The latter offence concerned a door to the value of £50. The appellant had numerous previous convictions. The District Judge imposed concurrent Detention and Training Orders for 4 months on each charge. This is the minimum term of Detention and Training Order permitted by section 101 of the Powers of Criminal Court (Sentencing) Act 2000. As Rose LJ put it in R v Inner London Crown Court ex parte M and S [2001] 1 Cr.App.R(S) 99, the section has the effect of raising the custody threshold for defendants of the relevant age.
There is no challenge to the lawfulness of the sentence for theft and the appellant has completed his sentence, so the outcome of this appeal is of no more than academic interest to him. Nevertheless, the case is properly brought before this court to test the lawfulness of the sentence for criminal damage.
Since the Criminal Law Act 1977, offences of criminal damage involving less than a specified amount in value have been summary only. The legislation is now contained in section 22 of the Magistrates' Court Act 1980 and the specified value, originally £200, is now £5,000. Section 33(1)(a) of the 1980 Act provides that the maximum penalty in a Magistrates' Court (that is to say what is generally known as the adult court) is 3 months' imprisonment and/or a fine of £2,500. So an adult offender in the Magistrates' Court could not have received a custodial...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
KK v MA and Others
...bankrupt's entitlement to the surplus (see s. 330(5), Jones v Philpott [1900] 1 Ch 822 and Phillips v Symes [2005] EWHC 2867 (Ch), [2006] All ER (D) 16 (Oct), [2006] BPIR 1430). 29 The effect of that combination is that the bankrupt has an interest in the surplus that he can deal with (e.g......
-
Rian Michael Iles v R
...be wrong to impose on a young offender a sentence more severe than that applicable to an adult—compare the decision of Bean J in P v. Leeds Youth Court [2006] EWHC 2527 (Admin). 39 In these circumstances, the answer to the query raised by the Registrar is that the committal for trial to the......
-
B v Leeds Crown Court Crown Prosecution Service (Interested Party)
...the distinction diminishes as the offender approaches 18. In reinforcement of that principle, Mr De la Poer has cited the case of P v Leeds Youth Court [2006] EWHC 2527 (Admin). In that case the district judge had imposed a detention and training order of 4 months when sentencing a 17-year-......