Sentences with phrase «dangerous offenders given»

The Criminal Justice and Immigration Bill, published this week, will also give powers to courts to ensure dangerous offenders given a discretionary life sentence serve a higher proportion of their tariff before becoming eligible for parole consideration, and create a presumption that trials in magistrates» courts will proceed in the absence of the accused.

Not exact matches

Through this partnership, we fund the establishment of drug and alcohol courts that give the most dangerous, repeat offenders access to the care they need, and reduce the rate of recidivism.

Brodksy, who acted for J.D.S., says the case reflects the ease with which Ontario Crowns often seek and obtain dangerous offender designations given Klassen's comments that the offender was unlikely to reoffend.

If an indication is given, the judge should make it clear that if the defendant is later assessed as «dangerous», the sentences mandated by CJA 2003 — an indeterminate or extended sentence — will be imposed and that, if the accused is assessed as dangerous, the indication can only relate to the notional determinate term which will be used in the calculation of the minimum specified period the offender would have to serve before he may apply to the Parole Board to direct his release or, in a case where an extended sentence is the only lawful option, it will relate to the appropriate custodial term within the extended sentence — that is, the indication does not encompass the length of any extension period during which the offender will be on licence following his release.Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Commencement No 16) Order 2007 (SI 2007/1999) Section 29 of CJA 2003 creates (in the case of public prosecutions only) a new method of commencing criminal proceedings — written charge and requisition, to replace laying an information and issuing a summons.

If the judge decides to give an indication where an assessment of future risk remains to be made he should make the following matters clear: (i) The offence (or one or more of them) is a specified offence listed in CJA 2003, Sch 15, bringing into operation the «dangerous offender» provisions.

A presumption that a given accused is a «dangerous offender,» worthy of indefinitely incarceration, is therefore in violation of the principles of fundamental justice, as follows:

The Challenger argued that the Law violated his due process rights because the State's registration process «stigmatized» him since his inclusion within the registry immediately lead to the conclusion that he was a dangerous sex offender and the Law did not give him any means to challenge this classification.