Archive for November, 2009
Using a Mobile Phone While Driving – Expert Legal Advice
Thursday, November 5th, 2009Traffic Offence Scotland
Wednesday, November 4th, 2009Sentencing Guidelines Scotland
Every case depends upon its own facts and circumstances and the personalities in the court where your case will be heard. For an informed discussion and advice on what you may expect by way of sentence in your own case just call us on 0800 612 9597 or go online to www.roadtrafficlaw.com/ask_a_lawyer.htm
o There are no sentencing guidelines currently in existence in Scotland. In other jurisdictions like England the Magistrates are issued with guidance on sentencing.
o Sentencing is a matter for the judge at first instance, who will consider each case on its own merits.
o The judge’s discretion is tempered by statute – which may provide for particular sentencing options, and occasionally, mandatory sentences – and the decisions of the Appeal Court.
o Section 197 of the 1995 Act, headed, “Sentencing Guidelinesâ€, provides: “Without prejudice to any rule of law, a court in passing sentence shall have regard to any relevant opinion pronounced under section 118(7) or section 189(7) of this Actâ€. Sections 118(7) and 189(7) empower the Appeal Court, when disposing both solemn and summary appeals, to pronounce an opinion on the sentence or other disposal or order which is appropriate in any similar case. The Appeal Court has apparently seldom used this power to issue “advisory judgments†on sentencing matters.
Why
o The sentencing system in Scotland has the advantage of being flexible and fair: each sentence will be tailored to the specific circumstances of the offence and the offender. The sentencing process is wholly undertaken by an independent judge who will have heard all the relevant evidence.
Developments
o Recent research has found that although there is little evidence of widespread inconsistency in sentencing in Scotland, there is nonetheless a general perception of inconsistency.
o Consistency in sentencing is seen as an essential part of fairness and justice: “like cases should be treated alikeâ€. Consistent sentencing which is transparent and predictable is said to be important to maintain public confidence in the justice system. It also allows practitioners to provide better advice to their clients.
o The Scottish Government has produced a consultation paper, Sentencing Guidelines and a Scottish Sentencing Council: Consultation and Proposals (September 2008) in which the establishment of a statutory sentencing advisory body – a Scottish Sentencing Council (SSC) – is proposed. The SSC’s main function would be to prepare draft sentencing guidelines for approval by the Appeal Court. Consultation closes on 21 November 2008. This paper followed a report by The Sentencing Commission for Scotland, The Scope to Improve Consistency in Sentencing (2006), which had made similar recommendations.
The Position In England
General
o The Sentence Guidelines Council (SGC), advised by the Sentencing Advisory Panel, is responsible under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 for producing sentencing guidelines. Before the SGC was established, the Court of Appeal had responsibility for producing sentencing guidance.
o Guidelines are produced for particular offences and classes of offences as well as on overarching principles, and issues such as reduction in sentence for a plea of guilty.
Road Traffic Offences
o Most of the relevant SGC guidance on road traffic matters is contained in the current Magistrates’ Guidelines (also produced by the SGC), which has a section on motoring offences (pp 117-140).
o Each offence (or class of offence) has its own separate guideline which charts the reasoning process that magistrates should follow when sentencing as well as giving a suggested appropriate range of sentences depending on the circumstances of the particular offence.
o The guidelines are generally structured as follows:
1. Name of offence and statutory provision
2. Statement of statutory minimum or maximum; whether statute provides any mandatory sentence
3. Reasoning process to be followed
· Form preliminary view of the appropriate sentence
o Appropriate starting point
§ Circumstances of the offence – starting point – range
o Effect of aggravating/mitigating factors
§ Non-exhaustive lists of factors indicating higher or lower culpability
· Consider offender mitigation (circumstances of offender)
· Consider guilty plea reduction
· Consider ancillary orders
· Decide sentence and give reasons
The full version of the Guidelines is available at: http://www.sentencing-guidelines.gov.uk/docs/magistrates_court_sentencing_guidelines_update.pdf
Extracts from Magistrates’ Guidelines – Road Traffic Offences
The following tables are extracted from the current Guidelines and show starting points and ranges for common road traffic offences according to the circumstances of the offence. They do not reproduce the guideline for any particular offence in full. Reference is made to bands of fines: the approach to financial penalties is dealt with in detail in the Guidelines at pp 147 et seq.
Excess alcohol (drive/attempt to drive) (s 5(1)(a) RTA 1988)
|
Alcohol level |
|
|
Starting point |
Range |
Disq |
Disq if 2nd offence in 10 years |
|
Breath (mg) |
Blood (ml) |
Urine (ml) |
|
|
|
|
|
36-59 |
81-137 |
108-183 |
Band C fine |
Band C fine |
12-16 months |
36-40 months |
|
60-89 |
138-206 |
184-274 |
Band C fine |
Band C fine |
17-22 months |
36-46 months |
|
90-119 |
207-275 |
275-366 |
Medium level community order |
Low level community order – high level community order |
23-28 months |
36-52 months |
|
120-150 and above |
276-345 and above |
364-459 and above |
12 weeks custody |
High level community order to 26 weeks custody |
29-36 months |
36-60 months |
Dangerous driving (s 2 RTA 1988)
|
Examples of nature of activity |
Starting point |
Range |
|
Single incident where little or no damage or risk of personal injury |
Medium level community order |
Low level community order
Disqualify 12-15 months |
|
Incident(s) involving excessive speed or showing off, especially on busy roads or in built up area
OR
Single incident where little or no damage or risk of personal injury but offender was disq driver |
12 weeks custody |
High level community order to 26 weeks custody
Disqualify 15-24 months |
|
Prolonged bad driving involving deliberate disregard for safety of others
OR
Incident(s) involving excessive speed or showing off, especially on busy roads or built up area, by disq driver
OR
Driving as described in box above while being pursued by police
|
Crown Court |
Crown Court |
Speeding (s 89(10) RTRA 1984)
|
Speed limit (mph) |
Recorded speed (mph) |
|
|
|
20 |
21-30 |
31-40 |
41-50 |
|
30 |
31-40 |
41-50 |
51-60 |
|
40 |
41-55 |
56-65 |
66-75 |
|
50 |
51-65 |
66-75 |
76-85 |
|
60 |
61-80 |
81-90 |
91-100 |
|
70 |
71-90 |
91-100 |
101-110 |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Starting point |
Band A fine |
Band B fine |
Band B fine |
|
Range |
Band A fine |
Band B fine |
Band B fine |
|
Points/disq |
3 pts |
4-6 pts OR disq 7-28 d |
Disq 7-56 d OR 6 pts |
Police Stations Procedures for Requests for Blood or Urine Samples in Drink Driving Cases
Sunday, November 1st, 2009
Sections 7, 8 and 9 of the Road Traffic Act 1988 provides the procedure which must be followed by the police when samples of blood/urine are taken.
The admissibility of those specimens as evidence against a motorist depends upon the procedures being followed correctly. We always seek the 4:8:1 form that should be a record of the procedures followed and often therefore acts as the cornerstone of our cross examination in such cases. We will also seek sight of the intoximeter log to ensure that it was working properly on the day of the given sample.
As a suspected drink driver you have a legal obligation to provide a laboratory sample when one of the four reasons set out at section 7(3) occurs. BUT before such a sample is taken the driver needs to be provided with certain information by the police:
- he has to tell the motorist the reason under terms of s.7(3) why breath specimens cannot be taken or used in this matter;
- he should tell the driver that in those circumstances he is required to give a sample of blood or urine, but that the officer will decide which. Many drivers believe that they have the choice but this is wrong, the choice is with the police officer dealing with the case.
- he must warn the driver that a failure to provide the sample required may result in prosecution;
- and if he has asked for a sample of blood,
- he should ask the driver if there is any medical reason why a specimen cannot or should not be taken by a doctor.
When, in the circumstances set out at section 8(2), a driver may choose to replace a breath specimen by supplying a laboratory sample,
The officer should inform the driver of the nature of the option open to him and what will be involved if he exercises it;
- he must inform the driver that the specimen of breath which he has given containing the lower proportion of alcohol exceeds the statutory limit; but does not exceed 50 microgrammes of alcohol in 100 millilitres of breath;
- he should inform the driver that in the circumstances he is entitled to claim to have this specimen replaced by a specimen of blood or urine if he wishes; We have heard countless tales of drivers claiming that the police officer told them not to bother as it would serve no real benefit to the…Rbbish, you should, where the opportunity arises ask for a blood sample to be provided. If there are medical reason why you cannot give blood then make sure that these reasons are stated and recorded.
- he police officer should ask the driver if there are any medical reasons why a sample of blood cannot or should not be taken. Having read the above if you thnk the procedures for you were any different then get in touch and we may be able to win your case and save your driving licence.