Burinskas, R v
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
- MR JUSTICE MITTING
- MRS JUSTICE THIRLWALL DBE
Areas of Law
- Criminal Law and Procedure
2014
COURT OF APPEAL (CRIMINAL DIVISION)
United Kingdom
CORAM
AI Generated Summary
The court examined eight cases concerning the implications of the Legal Aid, Sentencing, and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 on sentencing dangerous offenders. The judgments clarified the criteria under which life sentences or extended sentences for public protection could be imposed, highlighting adjustments to sentencing principles post-LASPO amendments.
Judgment
Lord Thomas of Cwmgiedd, CJ :
Note: REPORTING RESTRICTIONS
The provisions of the Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 apply to offences in all of these cases save the fourth case, Hanson. No matter relating to a person against whom a sexual offence has been committed may be reported if it is likely to lead members of the public to identify the person as a victim of the offence.
Introduction
This is the judgment of the court to which we have all contributed.
The eight cases before the court give rise to a consideration of the effect upon sentencing of amendments to the dangerous offender provisions in Chapter 5, Part 12 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 (CJA 2003) made by the Legal Aid Sentencing and Punishment of Offenders Act 2012 ( LASPO) . In six cases life sentences were passed. In the other two extended sentences were passed.
There are seven applications for permission to appeal against sentence which were referred to the Full Court by the Registrar. There is also an application by HM Attorney General under s.36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 . Save when dealing with the detail of the Attorney General’s application (Burinskas) we shall refer to all those whose sentences we are considering as appellants. They are all over 21. We grant leave to the Attorney General and have substituted a life sentence. Although we have only quashed the life sentence in two of the appeals and substituted extended sentences for public protection, we grant leave in all cases.
I: THE GENERAL APPROACH
1. The legislative background
(i) The position before the CJA 2003
In the years prior to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 , there were three kinds of indeterminate sentence:
The mandatory life sentence for murder.
The automatic life sentence under the Crime (Sentences) Act, re-enacted as s.109 in the consolidation in the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 .
The discretionary life sentence.
At paragraph 20 below, we set out the considerations this court said should be taken into account when considering passing a discretionary life sentence.
(ii) IPP
The dangerous offender provisions of the CJA 2003 enacted, in addition to a sentence of life imprisonment, a new form of indeterminate sentence - the sentence of imprisonment for public protection (IPP). The conditions for the imposition of a sentence of IPP were modified in 2008. As we explain at paragraphs 13-14, this court set out the considerations that a court should take into account when