Regrettably, Miss H had a very high breath reading, which was in excess of 120ųg in 100ml of breath.  The starting point for any reading at this level would automatically attract a custodial sentence as a starting point.  To compound matters, Miss H had driven into 5 stationary vehicles without stopping and caused in excess of £15,000 worth of damage.  Obviously, with such a high breath reading and an aggravating feature of failing to stop after driving into a number of vehicles, there was a very real possibility that a custodial sentence would be imposed and indeed, this was indicated by the Magistrates at the first hearing and Miss H was ordered to see the Probation Service for the preparation of a pre-sentence report.

In cases such as these, if the Magistrates are considering sentencing a defendant to a period in custody, the preparation of a pre-sentence report is required by the Probation Service who will meet with the defendant and make recommendations to the Magistrates.

At the sentence hearing, Carl presented powerful mitigation on Miss H’s behalf to try and persuade the Magistrates not to impose an immediate prison sentence and to consider instead imposing a suspended sentence.  The report from the Probation Service also agreed with Carl’s view that a prison sentence would have a negative impact due to Miss H’s vulnerability and she would be at risk of exploitation by other inmates.  The devastating impact a custodial sentence would have on her family was also a factor as Miss H is a single mother with highly dependent children.

The Magistrates were persuaded by Carl’s representations and decided to suspend the custodial sentence.  Obviously, Miss H was delighted with the outcome as she genuinely feared that she would be going to prison.

Failing to stop at the scene of an accident carries between 5-10 endorsable penalty points. Likewise, failing to report an accident carries between 5-10 endorsable penalty points. Careless driving carries between 3-9 penalty points. Mr D was very concerned that his licence would be revoked and requested that Carl Millar try to persuade the Court to give him a short period of disqualification instead of his licence being revoked.

If somebody’s licence is revoked then they will need to arrange for a driving test once again which will involve applying for a provisional licence and being subject to the terms of a provisional licence, before having to pass both the theory and practical driving tests before they are in a position to be able to drive. Also, the penalty points will remain on the licence. All three aforementioned offences carry a discretionary period of disqualification.

In Mr D’s case, Carl Millar was able to persuade the Magistrates at Trafford Magistrates Court to disqualify Mr D for a very short period, instead of his licence being revoked. This has the advantage of the defendant not having to take his tests again, and he will have a clean licence once the period of disqualification has expired.