Tag Archives: suspended sentence

News

Suspended sentence for Grievous Bodily Harm at Chesterfield

suspended sentence grievous bodily harm chesterfield
Chesterfield crime solicitor David Gittins

Chesterfield Crime Solicitor David Gittins recently represented a young man before Chesterfield Magistrates Court. His client had been charged with the serious offence of section 20 Grievous Bodily Harm or GBH.  It was alleged he had broken the jaw of the complainant.

The sentencing guidelines mean that such an offence will regularly carry a custodial sentence upon conviction.  Furthermore, such cases will often be dealt with before the Crown Court.

In this case, David gave careful consideration to the guidelines and the facts.  As a result he was able to convince the court not only to keep the case but also to impose an alternative to immediate custody.

Free police station advice and representation

Experienced Police Station Representative Rob Lowe first attended Chesterfield Police station with our client.  This was some months before the matter finally came before the court.

Chesterfield Police Station Representative Rob Lowe

Rob was able to provide free legal advice following arrest for grievous bodily harm. This was under the legal aid scheme.  Such advice is not means tested so as a result will always be free of charge.

Having a legal representative in the police station is always important.  Rob was able to secure information from the police about the incident.  As a result the client knew in advance what the allegation was.  Rob took our client’s instructions. He was then able to advise on the strength of the evidence.

The evidence was very strong  as our client was named as the aggressor. Our client accepted that he was guilty of the offence.  He then had a decision to make as to whether he would answer police questions or not.

Rob was able to explain that there is often something to be gained by answering police questions even where a person will accept guilt at court.  In this case it was important that our client explain at the outset why he had acted as he did.  It was an early opportunity for him to say how sorry he felt.  This would help him gain maximum credit on sentence when the case reached court.

Late service of CCTV evidence (again)

When the matter was eventually charged David took over the management of the case to prepared the case for court.  Although the entire incident was covered by CCTV this was not available until the day the case was first in court.

The footage was clear and showed our client punching the victim once to the face.  He was knocked to the ground. Sadly the victim was left with a fractured jaw that needed surgery.  The Prosecution was to argue that the case should be allocated to the Crown Court as the Magistrates’ sentencing powers were insufficient.

Representations on mode of trial and allocation

David was able to argue against that, relying on a number of factors:

  • The CCTV footage showed his client breaking up a fight immediately before he threw the punch
  • he walked off straight away
  • there was a single punch so no follow up
  • he was of good character
  • he was only 18 at the time of the incident
  • his early admission of guilty

The Magistrates were taken through the relevant sentencing guidelines in detail.  As a result, despite prosecution representations, the Magistrates agreed the case could remain in their court.  The case was adjourned in order that a pre-sentence could be obtained from the probation service.

Suspended sentence for Grievous Bodily Harm

When the matter returned to Court a week later the Probation service had prepared a report.  Although prison remained an option, the report concluded that our client’s risk could be managed outside the prison system. As a result, any punishment could properly be within the community.

David’s powerful and reasoned mitigation led to his client receiving a twelve week sentence of imprisonment.  This sentence would be suspended.  This was combined with community elements and compensation.

As a result our client was understandably delighted.  He realised just how close he had come to receiving an immediate prison sentence.

Contact a Chesterfield Criminal Defence Specialist

Without condoning violence, the outcome shows that with the right preparation a court can be persuaded to sentence on the basis of single mistake that will never be repeated.  There is often flexibility within the guidelines to permit a sentence that properly reflects the mitigation available to a client.

However, you will only be able to secure the best result for you in the circumstances if you choose your legal representatives carefully.

If you face a police investigation or court proceedings for an offence such as Grievous Bodily Harm then you can contact David or Rob at our Chesterfield office on 01246 283000.  Alternatively you can use the form below to email your enquiry to us.

Contact

News

Breach of a suspended sentence at Chesterfield Magistrates

breach of a suspended sentence Chesterfield criminal solicitor
Chesterfield crime solicitor David Gittins

Chesterfield Crime Solicitor David Gittins recently represented a client in difficulties at Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court.  The client had committed an offence in breach of a suspended sentence.

The court would have to be given a good reason not to activate the sentence.

 

 

The Allegation

David’s client had been arrested in relation to two allegations of common assault owing to having been drinking all day.  He had drunk about 20 pints of lager so had not considered the consequences.

His partner who had been with him left the public house.  Unfortunately she had taken an item of sentimental value belonging to the pub landlord.  As a result the landlord understandably followed her and retrieved the item.  Meanwhile, David’s client remained at the pub.

When his partner returned she was suddenly tripped up and landed heavily on the floor.  Without thinking, our client punched the male to the face and a small scuffle began. The scuffle ended after a few moments and the David’s client began talking to others at the scene.

During this time, he lashed out again, punching another male to the face before walking away from the pub.

Offence in breach of a suspended sentence

When charged and before the court David’s client accepted that he was guilty of the charges.  He entered guilty pleas.  Unfortunately, these offences were committed in breach of a suspended sentence imposed three weeks previously.

As a result, the court would immediately consider that the suspended sentence ought to be activated.  A separate sentence would be imposed for the new offences. The likelihood was that this would happen at the first appearance and without reports being prepared.

Mitigation sought to try and avoid the inevitable

David secured information to put before the Court in a bid to convince it not to send his client to prison.  David took detailed personal mitigation from his client. The client was very proud to say that he had undertaken a period of alcohol abstinence and had been dry, albeit for a short period.

His main concern was not for himself but rather his daughter.  He cared for her four nights per week so that his ex-partner was able to work on the evenings he had his daughter.  If his client was sent to prison it was unclear who would provide the necessary case.  His ex-partner may have had to leave her employment because there were no other family members close by to assist.

Additionally any period of imprisonment would have resulted in our client’s  online business closing so staff would be made redundant. His current partner would be as a result unable to maintain payments on their family home.  Customers would lose out as well.

David spoke with the probation service at court.  Therefore he gained information confirming that his client was progressing well on his suspended sentence order.  He had begun to resolve long term issues in his life.

Unjust to activate the suspended sentence

Owing to his detailed preparation, David was able to address the Magistrates at length about the reasons behind the recent offending.  He could provide significant personal mitigation.  David outlined the good progress that his Client was making under his current order.  Much emphasis could also be placed on the impact to others if our client was sent to prison.  This last factor was perhaps the most important in persuading the court it was unjust to activate the prison sentence.

After listening to this extensive mitigation the Magistrates agreed that the suspended sentence should not be activated. Instead they imposed a community order with a stand alone curfew for 12 weeks.

Following the breach of a suspended sentence the court extended the operational period by 6 months.

Our client was relieved not to face a prison sentence and because of that he was delighted with the outcome.

 Contact a Chesterfield Criminal Defence Lawyer

If you find yourself under investigation by the police or face court proceedings and wish to instruct David then please him telephone at our Chesterfield office on 01246 283000.

Alternatively you can contact him using the form below.

Contact

 

News

Drink driving sentence at Nottingham Magistrates’ Court

drink driving sentence nottingham motoring solicitor
Nottingham and Newark crime solicitor Lauren Manuel

Nottingham and Newark crime solicitor Lauren Manuel recently represented a client appearing before Nottingham Magistrates’ Court for drink driving.  Her mitigation meant that he avoid an immediate prison sentence even though his reading was over four times the legal limit.

Lauren represented her client under an affordable fixed fee agreement.

Drink driving – over four times the legal limit

The client was driving his motor vehicle in Nottingham during rush hour.    A witness saw the client drive wide around a bend crossing the central line.  He tried to correct the vehicle.  The car then headed towards a kerb and he lost control of the car.  It hit a telegraph pole with enough force so that it caused the pole to be sheared off.  It fell into the path of oncoming traffic.

Lauren’s client then attempted to get out of the vehicle and leave the scene.  Instead he was detained by members of the public.  He cooperated with the police when they asked for a specimen of breath.  Unfortunately it was over four times the limit.  The offence was further aggravated as he had neither insurance cover or a valid driving licence.

Mitigation avoids immediate prison sentence

Such a high reading in combination with the aggravating circumstances would normally result in an unavoidable and immediate prison sentence.   Instead, Lauren was able to use her experience and persuasive advocacy to ensure that the Magistrates felt able to impose a suspended sentence instead.

Lauren identified that she would be able to put compelling personal mitigation before the court so that prison could be avoided.  She was able to demonstrate to the Magistrates that her client needed assistance.  Of late he had found himself in extremely difficult circumstances.  Prior to those arising, and this incident, he had been a man of good character.  He had no previous convictions or cautions.

As a result, the court was able to balance her client’s personal mitigation and credit for his guilty pleas against the very serious aggravating features of the offence.

Although he was to be punished, that punishment was a suspended sentence.  He was to undergo rehabilitation and address his alcohol misuse.  He was, of course, disqualified from driving for a lengthy period.

Affordable Fixed Fee Representation

Although Lauren’s client was not financially eligible to receive free legal aid, she was able to offer him representation by way of an affordable fixed fee.

Contact a motoring law solicitor

Whether you are admitting an offence or intend to contest an allegation such as drink driving you will benefit from seeking expert advice and representation.  If you wish to speak to Lauren then please contact her on 0115 9599550.  Alternatively you can use the following contact form:

Contact

News

Conspiracy to defraud sentencing leads to positive client feedback

conspiracy to defraud nottingham criminal defence
Senior Crown Court litigator Laura Clarson

Nottingham crown court litigator Laura Clarson recently represented a client who face an allegation of conspiracy to defraud.

Laura’s client had been originally charged with conspiracy to defraud together with her brother.  She also faced two separate charges of fraud.

The allegations were serious so although of good character there was a real risk of a prison sentence.

The Allegations

It was alleged that she was guilty of conspiracy to defraud because she had opened a bank account.  Into this account money obtained by fraud could be deposited.

The individual frauds were based on the fact that she was in possession of two pre-paid cards that had been opened fraudulently. Large sums had been transferred onto the cards and the cards had been used. Both cards were registered to her address.

Conspiracy to defraud – basis of plea

At court, our client was represented by Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant.  He was able to negotiate pleas to a limited number of charges.  More importantly he was able to negotiate a basis of plea so that the risk of a prison sentence was reduced.

The prosecution accepted pleas to the conspiracy and to converting criminal property.  The second charge was in relation to the bank account.  Additionally, Phil persuaded the Crown not to pursue the charges relating to the pre-paid cards.

The basis of plea limited her involvement in the conspiracy to a single transaction.  This accurately reflected our client’s admitted involvement in the conspiracy.

Mitigation for a Suspended Sentence

Following plea, Laura’s client had the benefit of a pre-sentence report prepared by probation.  Phil put forward mitigation emphasising her limited involvement, personal circumstances and her previous good character.  This led the Judge to decide he could suspend the prison sentence.

This was a very worrying time for our client so she was extremely relieved at being spared custody.  We were very pleased to be able to help her at a difficult time.

Positive Client Feedback

conspiracy to defraud client feedbackAlthough our staff don’t expect it, they are always pleased when they receive a ‘thank you’ from clients who are pleased with the outcome of their case or know that we have done all we can to secure the best outcome for them.

In this case, Laura and Phil’s client wished to go further so went to the trouble and expense of sending a card and flowers.
conspiracy to defraud positive client feedbackIn turn, we would like to wish our client all the best in the future and we hope that she is able to put what was an admittedly serious error of judgement behind her.

Contact Laura Clarson

Any Crown Court case will be serious so you will want a legal team who will fight to make sure you receive the best outcome.  In instructing Laura Clarson you will know that she will give your case the time and attention that it needs.

Please telephone Laura on 0115 9599550 or email her here.

 

News

Chesterfield Solicitor Secures Client a Further Chance

chesterfield criminal defence solicitor kevin tomlinson
Chesterfield Crime Solicitor Kevin Tomlinson

Chesterfield criminal defence solicitor Kevin Tomlinson used all of his considerable experience and persuasive powers in a recent case. before Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court.

His client was now before the court for a new offence.  The allegation was one of drink driving.  She was subject to a suspended sentence imposed only six weeks earlier.  She faced obvious difficulties in keeping her liberty.

The Allegation

The charge was excess alcohol.  Her reading was 61 micrograms of alcohol in 100 millimetres of breath.  The legal limit is 35 micrograms.

Kevin’s client attracted attention to herself because of her car was stuck in mud on a steep grassy bank.  This was at the rear of a pub.  The engine was switched on and was revving.  The wheels were spinning. It appeared to the Officers that the car had been driven from the Pub carpark onto the grass bank and had then got stuck.

Without the suspended sentence being in place, it was likely that bearing in mind the low reading the penalty would be a fine and disqualification.  The recent imposition of the suspended sentenec meant that the court would immediately think of activating the sentence.  There would be a separate penalty for the new offence.

Kevin took full instructions from the client to put before the Court.  His intention was to convince the Magistrates’ that it would be unjust to send his client to prison in all of the circumstances.  His client had never been to prison so it was important that she instructed an experienced advocate who knew the type on information he needed to seek to ensure a favourable outcome.

After spending this time, Kevin then spoke with a representative of the probation service.  They told him that his client was progressing well on her suspended sentence order. This enabled Kevin to argue that she ought to receive a further opportunity to work with the probation service.

 The Sentence

chesterfield crime solicitor
Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court

As he had spent the time necessary to seek full instructions and information from third parties, Kevin was able to address the Magistrates at length about the reasons behind the recent offending.  He could share personal mitigation and the good progress that his Client was making with Probation. In conclusion he said it would be unjust to send her to prison and invited the Court to impose a sentence that enabled her to keep her freedom.

After listening to the mitigation the Magistrates agreed with Kevin and agreed it would be unjust. The Court chose to impose a simple financial penalty and disqualify the Defendant from driving for 18 months. However, as a direct result of Kevin’s mitigation, the Court also offered Kevin’s client the opportunity to undertake an additional driving awareness course to reduce her ban by 25%.

To mark the breach of Suspended Sentence order the Magistrates were prepared to extend the operational period of the order by 6 months.

Client Feedback

Kevin’s client was delighted with the outcome and relieved to not face a custodial sentence.  She took the time to complete our client care questionnaire and told us ‘Mr Kevin Tomlinson was great’.  She was very satisfied with the service that she had received and would be certain to recommend him to others in a similar position.

 Funding

Our client had the benefit of legal aid.  This means that she was able to instruct Kevin as her criminal defence solicitor for free.

Contact Kevin Tomlinson – Criminal Defence Solicitor

If you face police investigation or court proceedings then you will need an experienced solicitor on your side.  Kevin can be contacted on 01246 283000 or by email here.

News

Chesterfield Criminal Defence Solicitor Secures Suspended Sentence

chesterfield criminal defence solicitor
Chesterfield Crime Solicitor Serena Simpson

Chesterfield criminal defence solicitor Serena Simpson recently defended a client before Chesterfield Magistrates Court.  The charges were allegations of domestic violence directed to a former partner.

The offences included an allegation of assault occasioning actual bodily harm (ABH) where she had stabbed the victim to the arm and chest with a knife. In addition it was alleged that Serena’s client had followed the male and further assaulted him by punching him to the face.

Serena first met her client when she had been refused bail by the police.  She was detained in the cells to be put before the court for a remand to prison custody.

On meeting the client, Serena immediately realised that she was a vulnerable adult herself.  She provided a history of domestic violence directed against her by the complainant in this case.

Offence on Bail

Serena’s client admitted that due to this prolonged abuse she had picked up a knife and stabbed her violent partner.  She had then turned herself in to the police.  She accepted that while on police bail she had seen the victim.  Although he had followed her, she had slapped him to the face.  There was a further minor public order offence that was denied.

The Prosecution suggested an alternative version in respect of the second allegation.  It was claimed that Serena’s client had followed the victim and punched him rather than slapped him.

Newton Hearing Listed

chesterfield criminal defence solicitor
Chesterfield Magistrates’ Court

Serena’s client pleaded guilty to both assaults.  As she disputed the extent of the allegations she put forward her account in a written ‘basis of plea’.  Her account was not accepted by the prosecution.  As the Court felt it would make a real difference to sentence the case was listed for a hearing to decide whether our client’s version of events was correct. This is a trial of issue or a ‘Newton Hearing’.

Serena successfully argued for bail for her client.  She then undertook the preparation for the contested hearing.  It became clear as the hearing the ex-partner did not want to attend court and give evidence.

Serena was keen to bring the case to an end as soon as possible as from meeting with her client it was clear that the ordeal of court proceedings was having an adverse effect on her.

Active Case Management

The case was listed for a case progression hearing at Serena’s request to ascertain whether the hearing was going to be effective in due course.  The prosecution was unable to make a decision until a week before the trial when it confirmed that a hearing was no longer sought and Serena’s client could be sentenced on her version of events.  Further, the public order allegation was dropped.

The case was not yet over, however.  Serena had to prepare for a difficult sentencing hearing as whatever the background her client had still admitted stabbing her ex-partner.

Starting Point of 18 Months?

Sentencing guidelines govern an allegation of ABH.  The prosecution argued that this case fell into the most serious band, and the starting point for any sentence ought to be 18 months imprisonment within a range of 1 to 3 years. Her case was likely to be committed to the Crown Court for sentence even with discount for plea.

Suspended Sentence

Serena provided mitigation to the court outlining the history of the relationship, including the violence directed at her client, and other elements of personal mitigation.  Serena persuaded the District Judge that the case did not fall into the top level of seriousness.  As a result, Serena’s client was able to receive a sentence of 16 weeks suspended for 2 years with a rehabilitation element.

The Judge made it clear that Serena’s mitigation had persuaded him to take this unusual course of action in a case involving knife crime.

Serena’s client was understandably delighted.

Legal Aid Funding

Our client had the benefit of legal aid.  This allowed her to instruct Chesterfield criminal defence solicitor Serena Simpson.  This advice and representation was free of charge to her.  Further information about funding can be found here.

Contact a Chesterfield Criminal Defence Solicitor

If you are investigated by the police or are at court you may wish to instruct Chesterfield criminal defence solicitors VHS Fletchers. Please telephone us at our Chesterfield office 01246 283000 or use the contact form below.

Contact

News

Sexual Activity with a Child Sentence

Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant

Nottingham solicitor advocate Phil Plant recently dealt with a serious case involving sexual activity with a child that required a sensitive presentation of mitigation to secure a just sentence for his client.  The preparation undertaken by senior crown court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier, including the request for a psychologist report, assisted greatly.

Sexual Activity with a Child

Phil’s female client had pleaded guilty to four offences of sexual activity with a child.  She had had a relationship with a teenage boy involving sexual contact.

sexual activity with a child
Nottingham Crown Court

The relationship had come to the attention of the boy’s mother.  She had contacted Phil’s client and told her of her son’s age.  She was instructed to end the relationship.  This advice was ignored and the relationship continued and moved to a sexual phase.

The boy had provided the police with a detailed victim impact statement describing how he felt that he had been made to grow up too fast.

Our Client was Vulnerable

In turn, Phil’s client presented as very vulnerable.  She suffered from learning impairment and a lack of social awareness.  She had suffered bullying at school and that had led to difficulties for her in forming peer to peer relationships.

In the view of her parents, and confirmed by a psychologist, she was less emotionally mature than her 15 year old sister.  In addition she had been diagnosed with epilepsy that on occasions left her with slurred speech.

Suspended Sentence Imposed

Phil had to approach the case with sensitivity.  The judge accepted that the offending fell within a sentencing bracket that had a starting point of 12 months for at least two of the offences.  The judge as persuaded, however, that taking into account all the personal mitigation a 16 month prison sentence could properly be suspended for 24 months.

Contact Us

If you face a serious case such as sexual activity with a child then you will need your case preparing and presenting by experienced lawyers with a view to securing the best outcome for you.  If you wish to contact Phil or Sarah then please telephone them on 0115 9599550 or email them here.

News

Prohibited Item into Prison Sentencing

Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant

Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant recently travelled to Northampton Crown Court to represent his client who was charged with conveying a prohibited item into prison.  The case was prepared by senior Crown Court Litigator Sarah Lees-Collier.

Prohibited Item Conveyed into Prison

prohibited item
Northampton Crown Court

Our client had arranged a visit to see her boyfriend in prison.  At the same time she had arranged to convey a mobile telephone and a quantity of the substance spice that at the time had been a legal high.  It has now been made illegal.

The drop was intercepted at the visits area, having been caught on CCTV.  Suspicions had been aroused when our client was seen passing her baby to her boyfriend.  The baby was reluctant to be passed over.  As this was taking place the swap was noticed.  The items were then seized.

Early Instructions

Phil took instructions from  his client. She maintained that she felt that her boyfriend was under pressure from people inside the prison.  She had made repeated attempts to bring it to the attention of the authorities including writing to her local MP.  These problems were largely ignored save that the defendant was moved prisons.  Within days of the defendant being moved her was viciously attacked and left with a noticeable scar.  It was a result of this attack that she felt under compulsion to take the item in to the prison.

Phil gave early realistic advice that all of this information might be effective mitigation, but would not provide her with a defence to bringing a prohibited item into prison. She accepted this advice and entered a guilty plea at her first Crown Court appearance.

Suspended Sentence Imposed

The Judge was initially prepared to adjourn for reports, and once all of the necessary information was before the court the sentencing Judge was prepared to suspend what was an inevitable prison sentence.  The decision was based on the effective mitigation that Phil was able to put before the court.

Contact Us

Crown court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier

It will be important to you that you receive early advice that allows you to out your best case before the court, whether that is the Magistrates’ or Crown Court.  If you face proceedings, please contact Phil or Sarah on 0115 9599550 or email them here.

News

Possession With Intent Sentencing – Suspended Sentence

Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant

Nottingham crime solicitor advocate Phil Plant and senior crown court litigator Ruth Campbell recently prepared a case for sentence before Derby Crown Court, securing a constructive rather than punitive sentence despite the published guidelines for possession with intent to supply Class A drugs.

Possession with Intent to Supply

possession with intent sentencing
Derby Crown Court

Our client had been charged with possession with intent to supply both heroin and crack cocaine. The police had carried out a raid on her house and found significant quantities of both types of drug.  The crack cocaine had been concealed about her person.  The quantities recovered were consistent with the supply of both of the drugs.  Our client had a long history of heroin use.

In interview our client had chosen to make no reply to questions put to her, as was her right.  Unfortunately, she then made matters worse for herself by failing to attend her first court hearing. Fortunately, she was allowed to remain on bail despite this.

Basis of Plea

Once her cases reached the Crown Court Phil discussed with the prosecution the possibility of a compromise.  His client would plead guilty to possession with intent to supply crack cocaine but would offer a plea of simple possession of the heroin.  The sale of the crack cocaine was said to be to fund her heroin addiction.  This compromise is called a ‘basis of plea’.

This compromise might prove significant upon sentence as it would be an aggravating feature were our client to be found guilty of supplying to different drugs.

The prosecution accepted the pleas on offer.  Despite a guideline starting point of 3 years even taking into account the plea Phil successfully argued that the case should be adjourned for a pre-sentence report to be prepared by the Probation service to see whether any realistic alternatives to custody should be imposed.

Constructive Sentence

At sentence,  the Judge was persuaded to impose a suspended prison sentence with community requirements despite the guidelines.  This was a far more constructive disposal and will give our client an opportunity. with support, to put her drug use behind her.

Contact Us

Custody may often not be as unavoidable as it might seem.  With careful preparation and the right approach a client may improve their chances of being dealt with leniently.  If you wish to discuss a case with Phil then please telephone him on 0115 9599550.  To speak to Ruth please telephone her on 01623 675816.  You can also email your enquiries here.