Abstract
This, the second part of a two-part article, discusses HM Advocate v GH (HCJ Appeal) in which the Crown appealed against a sentence of 15 months' imprisonment following the respondent's conviction for abusive behaviour, assault and robbery against his partner, focusing on the use of sentencing guidelines and the concept of appellate deference in appeals against sentence by reference to law and practice in Scotland and Canada.
| Original language | English |
|---|---|
| Pages (from-to) | 67-78 |
| Number of pages | 12 |
| Journal | Scots Law Times |
| Volume | 2025 |
| Issue number | 9 |
| Early online date | 14 Mar 2025 |
| Publication status | Published - 14 Mar 2025 |
UN SDGs
This output contributes to the following UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs)
-
SDG 5 Gender Equality -
SDG 16 Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions
Keywords
- Appeals against sentence
- Assault
- Canada
- Culpability
- Discretion
- Domestic violence and abuse
- Judicial decision making
- Offensive behaviour
- Robbery
- Scotland
- Sentencing guidelines
- Undue leniency
Fingerprint
Dive into the research topics of 'Guidelines, judicial discretion and the modern sentencing process – Part 2: The operation of sentencing guidelines and a comparative analysis of appellate deference in appeals against sentence'. Together they form a unique fingerprint.Cite this
- APA
- Standard
- Harvard
- Vancouver
- Author
- BIBTEX
- RIS