Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The first set of sentencing guidelines the Scottish Sentencing Council will seek to develop are guidelines on wildlife and environmental offences, and causing death by dangerous driving. Both are areas that are seen as complex, and can lead to difficult sentencing decisions. [29]
In New South Wales and Western Australia, "Dangerous driving occasioning death" is an equivalent to "Causing death by dangerous driving". The person's driving privileges, in Western Australia, will be suspended for at least 2 years [permanent dead link ], from the date of conviction. Should any of the following "Circumstances of aggravation ...
Dangerous operation causing bodily harm is a hybrid offence and may be tried summarily or by indictment. [15] Dangerous operation causing death may only be tried by indictment. [16] Custodial sentences will almost always be given as a result of a conviction for either type of dangerous driving charge. [citation needed]
Vehicular homicide is similar to the offense, in some countries, of "dangerous driving causing death". The victim may be either a person not in the car with the offending motorist (such as a pedestrian, cyclist, or another motorist), or a passenger in the vehicle with the offender.
The Guidelines are the product of the United States Sentencing Commission, which was created by the Sentencing Reform Act of 1984. [3] The Guidelines' primary goal was to alleviate sentencing disparities that research had indicated were prevalent in the existing sentencing system, and the guidelines reform was specifically intended to provide for determinate sentencing.
Sentencing guidelines define a recommended sentencing range for a criminal defendant, based upon characteristics of the defendant and of the criminal charge. Depending upon the jurisdiction, sentencing guidelines may be nonbinding, or their application may be mandatory for the criminal offenses that they cover.
The exception to this rule occurs when the court determines that such use would violate the ex post facto clause of the Constitution – in other words, if the sentencing guidelines have changed so as to increase the penalty "after the fact", so that the sentence is more severe on the sentencing date than was established on the date that the ...
[examples needed] A person under "dangerous offender" sentencing is typically held for a minimum term that coincides with the sentence the person would have received without the "dangerous offender" sentence, and thereafter is subject to review of the person's state of mind as a determination of eligibility for release. [citation needed]