Judgment delivered on 13 December 2018
The Prosecution Service
Aggravated violence punished with a concurrent sentence of imprisonment for 15 months and expulsion with a 12-year entry ban not in contravention of Denmark’s international obligations
T, a now 24-year-old Libyan citizen who had been lawfully residing in Denmark for about 19 years, had been found guilty in the District Court and the High Court of violence of a particularly heinous, brutal and dangerous nature and given a concurrent sentence of imprisonment for 15 months and unsuspended expulsion with a 12-year entry ban. T, who had previous convictions, had an unserved balance of sentences imposed under a previous conviction and two suspended sentences. He had also been sentenced to suspended expulsion. The aggravated violence was committed during the probation period of the two suspended sentences and the suspended expulsion. The case before the Supreme Court concerned, in particular, the determination of the penalty and the issue of expulsion.
The Supreme Court stated, among other things, that the general rule in Sections 40 and 61 of the Danish Criminal Code is that, if the convicted person commits a new punishable act during the probation period, a concurrent sentence will be imposed on him or her, and that the imposition of a concurrent sentence must be based on an overall assessment of the circumstances. The Supreme Court upheld the concurrent sentence of imprisonment for 15 months, referring, among other things, to the facts that T committed the severe act of violence shortly after his release on parole, and that T had committed the crime during the probation period for the two suspended sentences. Importance was also given to the nature of his previous offences, which included possession of hash for resale and extensive vandalism, although the offences were not similar.
With regard to the issue of expulsion, the Supreme Court held that unsuspended expulsion was not in contravention of the European Human Rights Convention and upheld the unsuspended expulsion with a 12-year entry ban.
The High Court had reached the same conclusion.