draft revised guidelines for summary offences in the magistrates’ court sentencing guidelines consultation – list of questions question 1

Draft revised guidelines for summary offences in the Magistrates’
Court Sentencing Guidelines consultation – List of questions
Question 1
Do you agree that offences generally should be presented in one
consistent format?
Yes
No
Please give reasons for your answer.
Question 2
Do you agree with this use of suggested points within a fine band for
the following offences:
• Alcohol sales
• Careless driving
• Drive whilst disqualified
• Excess alcohol drive/in charge
• Fail to provide evidential specimen in charge
• Football offences
• No insurance
• Speeding
• Taxi touting
• TV licence payment evasion
• Unfit through drink or drugs in charge
Yes
No
Please give reasons for your answer and specify which offence you are
referring to if your answer doesn’t apply to all of the offences
listed.
Question 3
Do you agree that conditional discharge is an appropriate option at
the lower end of the range for category 3 cases?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and/or highlight any
additional option you believe should be included.
Question 4
Do you agree that 'few entries in refusals/incident book' should
remain a higher culpability factor as drafted?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and/or highlight any
additional option you believe should be included.
Question 5
Do you have any other comments about any of the factors and/or ranges
for this offence?
Question 6
Do you agree with the draft guideline, in particular with the
culpability and harm factors and with the use of three levels of
seriousness?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and/or highlight any
additional options you believe should be included.
i) Do you consider the sentence passed in scenario A is proportionate?
Yes
No
If you do not agree, please tell us what sentence should be passed and
why.
ii) Do you consider that the sentence passed in scenario B is
proportionate?
Yes
No
If you do not agree, please tell us what sentence should be passed and
why.
iii) Do you consider that the sentence passed in scenario C is
proportionate?
Yes
No
If you do not agree, please tell us what sentence should be passed and
why.
Question 7
Do you agree with the draft guideline in respect of disqualification?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and/or highlight any
additional options you believe should be included. Please give any
other comments you have about this guideline.
Question 8
Do you agree with the proposed changes to the category one starting
point?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and your proposed
alternative.
Please give any other comments you have about this guideline
Question 9
Do you agree with this treatment of culpability?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and/or highlight any
additional factors you believe should be included.
Question 10
Do you agree with the proposed wording of the harm factor 'aggressive
or disruptive during attendance'?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and your proposed
alternative.
Please give any other comments you have about this guideline.
Question 11
Do you have any comments about this draft guideline?
Question 12
Do you agree with the proposed wording of this mitigating factor?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and your proposed
alternative.
Please give any other comments you have about this guideline.
Question 13
Do you agree with the proposed culpability and harm factors and the
inclusion of both generic and specific factors?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and/or highlight any
additional factors you believe should be included.
Please give any other comments you have about this guideline.
Question 14
Do you agree that the factor “aggressive towards staff” captures both
verbal and non-verbal behaviour, including offensive language?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and your proposed
alternative.
Please give any other comments you have about this guideline.
Question 15
Do you agree with the proposed aggravating and mitigating factors?
Yes
No
If yes, please provide your proposed wording and/or identify what you
would delete, with reasons supporting your decision.
Question 16
Do you agree with the proposed approach regarding fine bands?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and indicate those
offences for which you think a different approach should be taken.
Question 17
Do you agree with the proposed structure for this guideline?
Yes
No
Please give reasons for your answer.
Question 18
Do you agree with the proposed sentencing ranges?
Yes
No
Please give your proposals if you do not agree, with reasons
supporting your decision.
Please give any other comments you have about this guideline.
Question 19
Do you agree with the proposed step one and step two factors?
Yes
No
Should any be added or removed? If yes, please provide your proposed
wording and/or identify what you would delete, with reasons supporting
your decision.
Question 20
Do you agree with the proposed step one and step two factors?
Yes
No
Should any be added or removed? If yes, please provide your proposed
wording and/or identify what you would delete, with reasons supporting
your decision.
Question 21
Do you agree with the proposed culpability and harm factors?
Yes
No
Please give your reasons if you do not agree and/or highlight any
additional factors you believe should be included.
Question 22
Do you agree with the proposed lengths of disqualification?
Yes
No
Please give your proposals if you do not agree, with reasons
supporting your decision.

  • EVERY BELIEVER A WITNESS® 7 WEEKS OF WITNESSING FOLLOW
  • MTOTA02MUHASEBE TALİMATI SAYFA 4 4 TARIH 27122012
  • IV APPOINT COUNSEL PROMPTLY (ADULTS – COUNTY POPULATION GREATER
  • DOCUMENTO 07 MODELO DE CONVENIO PARA SUBVENCIONES DIRECTAS POR
  • PEW – POLICY EVALUATION WORKSHOP CONFERENCIA CEMFI 17 DE
  • IM A BELIEVER TONEX VERSE AMAZING GRACE HOW
  • NAME CLASS STORY CLUES STORY CLUES +
  • KONINKLIJKE NEDERLANDSCHE MAATSCHAPPIJ TOT BEVORDERING DER GENEESKUNST HUISARTS VERPLEEGHUISARTS
  • 32006D0213 ODLUKA KOMISIJE OD 6 OŽUJKA 2006 O UTVRĐIVANJU
  • 7 CEDEFOP SEMINAR ON INDIVIDUAL LEARNING ACCOUNTS AN INCENTIVE
  • 0 UCHWALA NR XVIII26 04 RADY GMINY LEONCIN
  • RATE A FULL PLATE QUALITY OF PRESENTATION 1 2
  • TRASTORNO LÍMITE DE PERSONALIDAD CONSTRUCTOS CARACTEROLÓGICOS FENOMENOLÓGICOS Y SU
  • PREFIJOS INGLESES Y EJEMPLOS EL PREFIJO CO SIGNIFICA COMPAÑÍA
  • DATE SUBMITTED PRODUCTION PROJECT PROPOSAL (NOT
  • VITÉZI REND AJÁNLOTT IRODALOM AZ 1934 ÉVBEN FELAVATOTT VITÉZEK
  • PUBLIC MEETING ROOM POLICY THE PUBLIC MEETING SPACES OF
  • ᄃ O BTÉN LOS 10 PRIMEROS MÚLTIPLOS DE 6
  • CAYCE – “CRADLE OF THE MIDLANDS” (A COMPREHENSIVE
  • CURRICULUM COMMITTEE TERMS OF REFERENCE THE GOVERNING BODY AT
  • NEW JERSEY STATE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION NEW JERSEY
  • OBRAZAC AO0004 OBRAZAC ZA PREDLOG ZA IMENOVANJE ČLANA SAVJETA
  • ANNE L RICHARDS THE AUDITOR GENERAL HEADQUARTERS DEPARTMENT OF
  • ACT 3 SCENE 1 (SECOND HALF) IN THIS SECTION
  • RESOLUCIÓN DE 9 DE JUNIO DE 2017 DEL ÓRGANO
  • APPLICATION PACK EVENING SEASON TICKET
  • KARTU SOAL PILIHAN GANDA ULANGAN TENGAH SEMESTER GENAP TAHUN
  • ZÁPIS Z 17 ZASEDÁNÍ RADY PRO ZRS ZE DNE
  • RESTATED ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION TO BE PREPARED AND FILED
  • RÉSZVÉTEL A TUDOMÁNYOS DIÁKKÖRI KONFERENCIÁN – SZIE MEZŐGAZDASÁG ÉS