In a case that stands to set a new precedent for young offenders, a teen who pleaded guilty to robbery has successfully appealed his sentence on constitutional grounds.Jahrico Tucker is to be released from the Co-Ed facility, after lawyer Larry Mussenden argued in the Court of Appeal that his client’s sentence to correctional training had been unconstitutional.Tucker was originally sentenced in Magistrates’ Court, after reversing his initial not guilty plea and admitted to robbing taxi driver Paul Trew.Tucker was accused alongside 18-year-old Edward Ottley of Pembroke, who faced a further charge of using an offensive weapon.The two had been part of a group driven by Mr Trew, on the night of November 14, from the Upper Crust restaurant in Sandys to a secluded parking lot behind Woodys Bar.Ottley was described by the Crown as the ringleader of the attack that followed, in which the cabbie was struck in the head with a metal bike part, and robbed of his cellular phone and other items.However, in part for his early guilty plea, cooperation with authorities and remorse for the attack, Ottley was sentenced to two years’ probation.Tucker was sentenced on April 26 to correctional training a three-year term in which young offenders become eligible to be considered for parole after serving nine months. Tucker was also already on two years’ probation for an earlier dishonesty offence.Appearing before Puisne Judge Charles-Etta Simmons, Mr Mussenden argued that Tucker’s sentence was unlawful and unconstitutional.Following a similar precedent to the recent appeal of murderer Ze Selassie, Mr Mussenden said that in sentencing Tucker, Senior Magistrate Archibald Warner had not set a minimum term.Justice Simmons said she understood the defence’s position to be that, in the case of correctional training, “the parole board was usurping the role of the court”.“The only options you are leaving this court is to get rid of his correctional training and substitute a period of probation, which he already has,” she said.“Your position is that the magistrate had no right to let the parole board determine how long he should be in custody.”Prosecutor Larissa Burgess agreed, saying: “The Crown is not opposed to this court correcting the sentence imposed by limiting it to a period (Tucker) has already served.”Justice Simmons then ruled that a minimum sentence of correctional training should have been set.She told Tucker that his time in custody would be set to his time served: a period of three months. Once released, he must undertake the term of probation set by his earlier case.Asked if he had learned anything, Tucker whose mother was in court replied: “Actually, I have.”Having obtained his GED, he said he wished to take an electronics course at the Bermuda College upon his release.