I've Been Charged With Section 20 And 39 I Broke A Cheek Bone Eye Socket And Wrist What Can I Expect

[Chinnyone1]

I broke a cheek bone wrist and eye socket I've been charged with section 20 and 39 what can I expect

[malagabob]

See Offence against the person act 1861 on Wikipedia.

[Chinnyone1]

I mean can I expect custodialetc

[Chinnyone1]

Section 20 gbh and section 39 battery

[malagabob]

Depends if you've got previous offences. Not sure if you've been done for GBH or ABH.

[Chinnyone1]

Charged with gbh without intent and section 39 battery no previous convictions

[malagabob]

Possibly a suspended sentence of 12 months plus community

[Flonska]

These two links might provide you with some information:

http://www.cps.gov.uk/legal/l_to_o/offences_against_the_person/

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/wp-
content/uploads/Assault_definitive_guideline_-_Crown_Court.pdf

Assuming that you are being represented, you might find it helpful to seek counsel's opinion.

[Chinnyone1]

I pleaded not guilty going to trial later the assault was done in front of two young children in their home o barged my way in as I wasn't invited in and the victim has all medical evidence etc

[hc4361]

On what grounds have you pleaded not guilty?

[Chinnyone1]

I was intoxicated

[nailit]

You gotta be kidding. Youre pleading not guilty on the grounds that you were intoxicated?

[jno]

some courts might see that as making things worse, rather than as an excuse, so you'd best present that evidence with care.

[hc4361]

Is the victim your partner/ex? Is this a domestic violence case?

[Buenchico]

Committing an offence while drunk always makes matters far WORSE in the view of a court, so trying to use drunkenness as a defence is pure madness.

Being found guilty after pleading 'Not guilty' adds 50% onto a custodial sentence (and makes the severity of non-custodial sentences greater too).

You've got no valid defence, so why make things worse for yourself? PLEAD GUILTY!

When sentencing a 'Section 20' offence, a judge has to consider both 'harm' and 'culpability'. Going to a person's home to assault them (and doing so in front of their children) almost certainly places 'culpability' in the 'high' category. The level of injuries sustained by the victim (plus the psychological trauma to the children) means that 'harm' is also likely to be assessed as 'high'. So it will seen as a 'Category 1' offence.

The 'starting point' sentence for a Category 1 Section 20 offence is one of 3 years imprisonment. The minimum sentence that can be passed is 2½ years imprisonment, with a maximum of 4 years. However those sentences apply to an offender who is convicted after a trial. An early 'not guilty' plea can see a reduction of one third in sentencing.

So, face up to it. You ARE going to prison. You can either plead 'not guilty' and get sentenced to 3 years (meaning that you'd actually be 'banged up' for 18 months) or plead 'guilty' and get sentenced to 2 years (meaning that you'd serve 12 months). [Sentencing for the Section 39 offence is probably irrelevant anyway, as it's likely that the sentences would be served concurrently anyway].

[Jackdaw33]

Majewski is the leading case on intoxication.

[Chinnyone1]

So a suspended sentence is unlikely as the neighbours had phoned 999 and the victims phoned two dropped 999 calls that night

[nailit]

Pack a toothbrush.
But seriously, have you got a solicitor?

[Buenchico]

A suspended sentence can only be passed in relation to sentences of less than two years imprisonment. Further, the sentencing guidelines for Section 20 (which judges have to work within) only refer to the possibility of a suspended sentence for a 'Category 3' offence (where both 'harm' and 'culpability' are seen as low).

[EDDIE51]

You have been told, you have NO POSSIBLE CHANCE of being found not guilty !
So just change your plea to guilty and do your 3 years, as Bueunchico says you will actually serve 18 months.