A juvenile cleared of a murder charge was later incarcerated for more than two years — after pleading guilty to dodging a $32 taxi fare.

And one child advocacy group is now questioning whether Gary Hollis was treated harshly by the courts for the minor misdemeanour in an act of retaliation by the justice system because the earlier charge of murder against him had been thrown out.

Mr Hollis, from Sandys, was just 17 years old and had no criminal record when he took a taxi ride home from Hamilton with three friends in the early hours of January 18, 2010.

But when their cab reached Spring Benny Road, the group ran off without paying.

Mr Hollis was arrested a month later and admitted the offence. In April 2010 he was sentenced to two years’ probation by Senior Magistrate Archibald Warner, who stipulated that the teen must abide by a 9pm to 6am curfew.

Only two months later, in June 2010, Mr Hollis appeared before the courts again for allegedly breaching the conditions of his probation. Although he denied that charge, he was sentenced to spend up to three years in the Co-Ed Facility. Mr Hollis had no legal representation throughout the proceedings.

He remained in custody for more than two years and was only released in December of 2012 after lawyer Saul Dismont was made aware of the case and launched an appeal on the teenager’s behalf.

That appeal finally came before the Supreme Court yesterday and it was only then that the facts of the case were revealed.

In July 2009, six months before Mr Hollis dodged his cab fare, he had been one of five teenagers on trial for the murder of Kellon Hill, who was fatally stabbed near Elbow Beach in August, 2008. Mr Hollis, who denied the charge, was alleged to have beaten Mr Hill with a helmet during a fight over a gold chain.

But the case against Mr Hollis and three of his co-accused was thrown out by the trial judge who ruled that they had no case to answer because of a lack of evidence. A fifth defendant, Kellan Lewis, was found guilty of manslaughter and sentenced to 12 years in prison.

Last night Nicola Feldman, of the Coalition for the Protection of Children, described Mr Hollis’s incarceration as “outrageous”.

“The extreme sentencing of this young man is worrying,” she said.

“It might lead one to think that the individual is being penalised as a result of the prior accusation related to the Kellon Hill murder. Two years’ probation and a curfew of 9pm seems excessively punitive for skipping out on a $30 cab fare and the fact that this young man served over two years incarcerated is outrageous.

“It is even more shocking that Mr Hollis remained at the Co-Ed Facility for two entire years before his case was appealed. Why wasn’t the injustice raised sooner? Chances are Mr Hollis returned from incarceration at even greater risk for criminal behaviours. If there were beliefs that Mr Hollis and his co-accused were on a criminal path, was there any social intervention which took place, or was the criminal justice system just waiting for them to offend? And what now will be done to provide support to this young man so that he does not become another recidivism statistic within the correctional system.

“The cab fare offence was a perfect case where restorative justice could have been used to hold the young man accountable for his actions, make amends to the individual who was offended against, yet ensure that no further harm was caused in the process of justice. Unfortunately instead, this case is a clear demonstration of where the criminal justice system has caused further harm.”

During yesterday’s hearing, Mr Dismont told the court the original probation sentence had been excessive, noting that adults who had committed similar offences had been given a conditional discharge.

And he also argued that the sentence breached guidelines set out under the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, of which Bermuda is a signatory.

The Crown also acknowledged that the appeal should be allowed and that Mr Hollis’s sentence should be quashed.

Following yesterday’s ruling Mr Dismont told The Royal Gazette: “There were three other people who jumped out of that cab with Mr Hollis to avoid the $32 dollar fare, so that makes them responsible for $8 each — yet he was given two years’ probation for that.

“That was a surprising sentence as he was still under 18. As he had no previous convictions, admitted it to the police, and pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, one may have expected that a conditional discharge was appropriate.

“Yes, he jumped out of a cab without paying, which is a stupid thing to do, but sometimes young people do stupid things. Basically, he ended up incarcerated for more than two years ultimately for the sake of $8.

“He also now questions whether he even breached his probation. He didn’t have a lawyer and didn’t understand what was going on in court. I understand he didn’t even know he was being sent to the Co-Ed, he thought he was going home until the court bailiff told him he had to go with him.

“When this kid was at the Co-Ed his mother reached out to me as she had heard that I had just got a child released who had been sent there illegally.

“When I met with Gary I told him I would be able to get him out. He didn’t believe me, he was convinced that he would be there for the full three years. And that’s part of the bigger problem with sentences of corrective training — they’re indeterminate, nine months to three years. I believe this has been fairly common in the courts for years but a sentence should be determinate. One should know how long one is going to be imprisoned, especially a child.

Although Puisne Judge Charles-Etta Simmons yesterday overturned the sentence, Mr Hollis was not able to leave the court a free man as he was recently remanded into custody on another, unrelated charge.