R v Sookoo
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | MR JUSTICE DOUGLAS BROWN |
| Judgment Date | 20 March 2002 |
| Neutral Citation | [2002] EWCA Crim 800 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | No: 200107169/X2 |
| Date | 20 March 2002 |
[2002] EWCA Crim 800
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
The Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
Lord Justice Judge
Mr Justice Douglas Brown and
Mr Justice Field
No: 200107169/X2
MR A BELL appeared on behalf of the Appellant
th March 2002
On 30th November 2001 in the Crown Court at Maidstone before His Honour Judge Neligan, this appellant, Neil Dexter Sookoo, pleaded guilty to a count of theft and a count of perverting the course of justice. For the offence of theft he was given six months' imprisonment concurrent to a sentence he was already serving and on the second count, perverting the course of justice, nine months' imprisonment consecutive to the first count, a total therefore of 15 months' imprisonment.
He now appeals against sentence by leave of the single judge.
The facts are very short. On the afternoon of 21st July 2001 a security controller at a department store in Chatham was alerted to the appellant's activities. He looked at what he was doing on a close circuit television camera and saw him carrying a large box running away from the store. He and a colleague gave chase. When the appellant saw them he dropped the box, which contained a set of saucepans worth £99 which he had stolen from the store. The box was recovered. After a long fast chase he was detained, taken back to the store and was arrested by the police.
When the police came he told them his name was Gavin Campbell and his date of birth 6th March 1979. He was interviewed and gave an innocent explanation as to his possession of the saucepans. He was charged and released on bail, the police at that stage believing that his name was Campbell.
However, subsequent investigations revealed that he had given a false name. On 23rd October 2001 he was rearrested under his correct name. He was interviewed and he admitted the offence.
The appeal is based on one simple submission. There is no challenge to the six months for the theft, but it is submitted that a nine month sentence for perverting the course of justice was manifestly excessive, the sentence was too long and it should not have been ordered to run consecutively. We are...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
R v Kenny
...the sanction of contempt of court will suffice. We would respectfully echo the observations in Archbold, at 28–2, themselves founded on R v Sookoo [2002] EWCA Crim 800, that in such cases the offence of perverting the course of justice should only be charged where there are serious aggravat......
-
Ronald Wyatt v Thames Valley Police
...course of public justice will amount to the offence, but the offence should only be charged where there are serious aggravating features: R v Sookoo The Times, April 10, 2002, CA; and R v Kenny [2013] 1 Cr.App.R.23, CA.” 102 In R v Sookoo, supra, Douglas Brown J stated at [8] to [9]: “7 It......
-
Government of the United States of America v Brian Dempsey
...at 28–4/5. He described the case law on the point in issue as “thin”. He referred to two decisions of the Court of Appeal Criminal Division: Sookoo [2002] EWCA Crim 800; Hamshaw [2003] EWCA Crim 2435. Both cases were instances of an arrested person giving false details on arrest. The Court ......
-
R v Clark (Mark Grosvenor)
...its use to serious cases. There is a note in para. 28 – 2 of Archbold which supports the latter suggestion. But in the case referred to, R v Sookoo (2002) EWCA Crim. 800, this court only sought to discourage the offence being charged in addition to a substantive offence unless there were se......