Robbery and reversal of youth sentence
Supreme Court judgment 26 June 2020, HR-2020-1351-A, (case no. 20-042708STR-HRET), criminal case, appeal against judgment.
A (Counsel Arild Christian Dyngeland) v. The Public Prosecution Authoriy (Counsel Birgitte Budal Løvlund)
Justices: Matningsdal, Matheson, Bergsjø, Falch, Høgetveit Berg
Before the expiry of a youth sentence for robbery, see section 52 b of the Penal Code, the convicted person committed a new robbery. The robbery took place at the home of the aggrieved party. It was brutal, involved several perpetrators, and threats of homicide were made. Serious threats were also made against other people present. The penalty for the robbery alone was stipulated to one year and six months of imprisonment, and the aggregate penalty for the new offences was stipulated to two years of imprisonment, after a small reduction had been granted due to confession. The judgment imposing the youth sentence, which stipulated an alternative sentence of two years of imprisonment, was reversed to one year and two months of imprisonment, see section 52 c of the Penal Code, after a reduction of two months for commenced serving of the youth sentence. The aggregate penalty was thus set to three years and two months of imprisonment.