A Level Law Practice Exam 2025 - Free A Level Law Practice Questions and Study Guide

When the Attorney-General believes that a sentence is unduly lenient, the appropriate course of action is to refer the case to the Court of Appeal for re-sentencing. This power is established under the Criminal Justice Act 1988, which allows the Attorney-General to review sentences passed in the Crown Court that may appear to be too lenient, and to seek a more appropriate sentence through the Court of Appeal's examination.

The Court of Appeal has the authority to assess the sentence and, if found to be unduly lenient, can impose a new sentence that reflects the severity of the offense. This process ensures that there is a check on sentencing consistency and helps maintain public confidence in the judicial system.

The other options do not align with the legal framework regarding the Attorney-General's powers. For instance, issuing an appeal to the Supreme Court is not applicable since the Supreme Court does not typically handle matters related to individual sentencing reviews from the Crown Court. Reducing the sentence unilaterally is outside the Attorney-General’s jurisdiction, as sentencing is a matter for the judiciary. Additionally, requesting a retrial is not relevant in this context, since that would imply issues with the original trial rather than a concern with the sentence itself.