Applicability In accordance with section of the Coroners and Justice Act , the Sentencing Council issues this definitive guideline. For sentencing children and young people, please see: Sentencing children and young people: Robbery Sentencing children and young people — overarching principles Structure, ranges and starting points For the purposes of section 60 of the Sentencing Code , the guideline specifies offence ranges — the range of sentences appropriate for each type of offence.
Culpability demonstrated by one or more of the following. Harm The court should consider the factors set out below to determine the level of harm that has been caused or was intended to be caused to the victim. The seriousness of the offence should be the initial factor in determining which requirements to include in a community order. Offence specific guidelines refer to three sentencing levels within the community order band based on offence seriousness low, medium and high.
The culpability and harm present in the offence s should be considered to identify which of the three sentencing levels within the community order band is appropriate. See below for non-exhaustive examples of requirements that might be appropriate in each.
A suspended sentence is a custodial sentence. Community orders can fulfil all of the purposes of sentencing. Where an offender is being sentenced for a non-imprisonable offence, there is no power to make a community order.
Sentencers must consider all available disposals at the time of sentence; even where the threshold for a community sentence has been passed, a fine or discharge may be an appropriate penalty. In particular, a Band D fine may be an appropriate alternative to a community order. Sentences should not necessarily escalate from one community order range to the next on each sentencing occasion. The decision as to the appropriate range of community order should be based upon the seriousness of the new offence s which will take into account any previous convictions.
In many cases, a pre-sentence report will be pivotal in helping the court decide whether to impose a community order and, if so, whether particular requirements or combinations of requirements are suitable for an individual offender. Whenever the court reaches the provisional view that a community order may be appropriate, it should request a pre-sentence report whether written or verbal unless the court is of the opinion that a report is unnecessary in all the circumstances of the case.
If an adjournment cannot be avoided, the information should be provided to the National Probation Service in written form and a copy retained on the court file for the benefit of the sentencing court. However, the court must make clear to the offender that all sentencing options remain open including, in appropriate cases, committal for sentence to the Crown Court. Custodial sentences Sentencing flowcharts are available at Imposition of Community and Custodial Sentences definitive guideline.
The approach to the imposition of a custodial sentence should be as follows: 1 Has the custody threshold been passed? A custodial sentence must not be imposed unless the offence or the combination of the offence and one or more offences associated with it was so serious that neither a fine alone nor a community sentence can be justified for the offence.
There is no general definition of where the custody threshold lies. The circumstances of the individual offence and the factors assessed by offence-specific guidelines will determine whether an offence is so serious that neither a fine alone nor a community sentence can be justified. Where no offence specific guideline is available to determine seriousness, the harm caused by the offence, the culpability of the offender and any previous convictions will be relevant to the assessment.
The clear intention of the threshold test is to reserve prison as a punishment for the most serious offences. Passing the custody threshold does not mean that a custodial sentence should be deemed inevitable. Sentencers should be clear that they would impose an immediate custodial sentence if the power to suspend were not available. If not, a non-custodial sentence should be imposed. Pre-sentence report Whenever the court reaches the provisional view that: the custody threshold has been passed; and, if so the length of imprisonment which represents the shortest term commensurate with the seriousness of the offence; the court should obtain a pre-sentence report, whether verbal or written, unless the court considers a report to be unnecessary.
Suspended Sentences: General Guidance i The guidance regarding pre-sentence reports applies if suspending custody. Previous convictions,. Previous convictions are normally relevant to the current offence when they are of a similar type. Numerous and frequent previous convictions might indicate an underlying problem for example, an addiction that could be addressed more effectively in the community and will not necessarily indicate that a custodial sentence is necessary.
If the offender received a non-custodial disposal for the previous offence, a court should not necessarily move to a custodial sentence for the fresh offence. In cases involving significant persistent offending, the community and custody thresholds may be crossed even though the current offence normally warrants a lesser sentence.
If a custodial sentence is imposed it should be proportionate and kept to the necessary minimum. Where the previous offence is particularly old it will normally have little relevance for the current sentencing exercise. The court should consider the time gap since the previous conviction and the reason for it. Where there has been a significant gap between previous and current convictions or a reduction in the frequency of offending this may indicate that the offender has made attempts to desist from offending in which case the aggravating effect of the previous offending will diminish.
Where the current offence is significantly less serious than the previous conviction suggesting a decline in the gravity of offending , the previous conviction may carry less weight.
When considering the totality of previous offending a court should take a rounded view of the previous crimes and not simply aggregate the individual offences.
Where information is available on the context of previous offending this may assist the court in assessing the relevance of that prior offending to the current offence. Offence committed whilst on bail. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence Section 64 of the Sentencing Code states: In considering the seriousness of any offence committed while the offender was on bail, the court must - a treat the fact that it was committed in those circumstances as an aggravating factor and b state in open court that the offence is so aggravated.
Victim is targeted due to a vulnerability or a perceived vulnerability. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence An offence is more serious if the victim is vulnerable because of personal circumstances such as but not limited to age, illness or disability unless the vulnerability of the victim is an element of the offence.
Other factors such as the victim being isolated, incapacitated through drink or being in an unfamiliar situation may lead to a court considering that the offence is more serious. The extent to which any vulnerability may impact on the sentence is a matter for the court to weigh up in each case.
Culpability will be increased if the offender targeted a victim because of an actual or perceived vulnerability. Culpability will be increased if the victim is made vulnerable by the actions of the offender such as a victim who has been intimidated or isolated by the offender.
Culpability is increased if an offender persisted in the offending once it was obvious that the victim was vulnerable for example continuing to attack an injured victim. The level of harm physical, psychological or financial is likely to be increased if the victim is vulnerable. Significant planning. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence Evidence of planning normally indicates a higher level of intention and pre-meditation which increases the level of culpability.
The greater the degree of planning the greater the culpability. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence The more sophisticated, extensive or persistent the actions after the event, the more likely it is to increase the seriousness of the offence.
Restraint, detention or additional degradation of the victim. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence Where an offender deliberately causes additional harm to a victim over and above that which is an essential element of the offence - this will increase seriousness.
A leading role where offending is part of a group activity. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence In general, an offence is not made more serious by the location of the offence except in ways taken into account by other factors in this guideline such as planning, vulnerable victim, offence committed in a domestic context, maximising distress to victim, others put at risk of harm by the offending, offence committed in the presence of others.
Care should be taken to avoid double counting. Courts should be cautious about aggravating an offence by reason of it being committed for example in a crowded place or in an isolated place unless it also indicates increased harm or culpability not already accounted for. An offence may be more serious when it is committed in places in which there is a particular need for discipline or safety such as prisons, courts, schools or hospitals. Timing of the offence.
Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence In general, an offence is not made more serious by the timing of the offence except in ways taken into account by other factors in this guideline such as planning, vulnerable victim, offence committed in a domestic context, maximising distress to victim, others put at risk of harm by the offending, offence committed in the presence of others.
Courts should be cautious about aggravating an offence by reason of it being committed for example at night, or in broad daylight unless it also indicates increased harm or culpability not already accounted for. Commission of offence whilst under the influence of alcohol or drugs. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence The fact that an offender is voluntarily intoxicated at the time of the offence will tend to increase the seriousness of the offence provided that the intoxication has contributed to the offending.
Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence This factor should increase the sentence only where there is clear evidence of wider harm not already taken into account elsewhere.
A community impact statement will assist the court in assessing the level of impact. For issues of prevalence see the separate guidance below: Prevalence Sentencing levels in offence specific guidelines take account of collective social harm.
Accordingly offenders should normally be sentenced by straightforward application of the guidelines without aggravation for the fact that their activity contributed to a harmful social effect upon a neighbourhood or community.
It is not open to a sentencer to increase a sentence for prevalence in ordinary circumstances or in response to a personal view that there is 'too much of this sort of thing going on in this area'.
First, there must be evidence provided to the court by a responsible body or by a senior police officer. Secondly, that evidence must be before the court in the specific case being considered with the relevant statements or reports having been made available to the Crown and defence in good time so that meaningful representations about that material can be made.
Even if such material is provided, a sentencer will only be entitled to treat prevalence as an aggravating factor if satisfied that the level of harm caused in a particular locality is significantly higher than that caused elsewhere and thus already inherent in the guideline levels ; that the circumstances can properly be described as exceptional; and that it is just and proportionate to increase the sentence for such a factor in the particular case being sentenced.
Failure to comply with current court orders. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence Commission of an offence while subject to a relevant court order makes the offence more serious. The extent to which the offender has complied with the conditions of an order including the time that has elapsed since its commencement will be a relevant consideration.
Where the offender is dealt with separately for a breach of an order regard should be had to totality Care should be taken to avoid double counting matters taken into account when considering previous convictions.
Offence committed on licence. Effective from: 01 October Care should be taken to avoid double counting factors including those already taken into account in assessing culpability or harm or those inherent in the offence An offender who is subject to licence or post sentence supervision is under a particular obligation to desist from further offending.
The extent to which the offender has complied with the conditions of a licence or order including the time that has elapsed since its commencement will be a relevant consideration. Where the offender is dealt with separately for a breach of a licence or order regard should be had to totality. Care should be taken to avoid double counting matters taken into account when considering previous convictions.
Every bank robbery case is unique. The exact criminal charges and related penalties will vary in accordance with the facts of the case. A convicted bank robber is subject to the following potential penalties:. Defending a bank robbery suspect begins by carefully reviewing the evidence and charges.
A knowledgeable bank robbery attorney will act quickly to have illegal evidence and testimony suppressed. Depending on the strength of the evidence, a defendant will be advised whether the bank robbery charge should be litigated in court or a plea bargain should be negotiated with the prosecution.
A successful plea agreement can result in reduced charges and penalties. The time to retain the services of a bank robbery lawyer is at the very beginning of an FBI investigation. A good defense lawyer who is experienced with defending criminal clients in federal court will definitely be required.
Even after a convicted felon is released from a federal penitentiary, a bank robbery conviction will continue to make life difficult. Obtaining employment, security clearances and housing is especially problematic for a convicted person.
Speak with Brett Podolsky at to learn about your defense options for a bank robbery charge. For a first-degree robbery, how many years you can get depends on a number of factors. The defense team AKA your lawyer will look for any discrepancies in your case to see if it can be reduced to a class B felony instead of a class A felony, which can be anywhere from 31 months to a lifetime in prison.
An armed robbery sentence may impact your life in many ways. Getting the right counsel is important to create a legal strategy that can, hopefully, improve your sentence. Call us now to arrange an appointment. First consultations are free. Skip to content.
Proven and Tried.
0コメント