Sophie Evans successfully argued that her client’s sentence was manifestly excessive.
Sophie’s 19 year-old client, AH, was charged with possession of a bladed article in a public place. He pleaded guilty at the first available opportunity. In September, he was sentenced at Croydon Crown Court to a period of 20 months’ immediate detention. The sentencing Judge had taken a starting point of 30 months’ detention, and then afforded 1/3 credit for AH’s guilty plea.
Grounds of Appeal were submitted on the basis that the sentence was manifestly excessive in that:
- The sentencing Judge erred in failing to give proper weight to the mitigating factors in AH’s case,
- The sentencing Judge erred in failing to consider the application of the Sentencing Council’s Guideline for Sentencing Children and Young People to AH’s case, therefore failing to follow the authority set out in R v Clarke [2018] EWCA Crim 185.
Leave to appeal was granted by the Single Judge.
At the hearing on 7th November, the Court of Appeal agreed that the sentencing Judge fell into error in failing to consider AH’s age and immaturity, as well as the relevance of the Sentencing Council’s Guideline for Sentencing Children and Young People. The Court took the view that in giving proper consideration to these factors, the appropriate starting point was one of 21 months’ detention before taking into account credit for guilty plea.
In allowing the appeal, the Court quashed the sentence of 20 months’, and replaced it with one of 14 months’ detention.
Sophie was instructed by Ben Dobson of Dobson Fisher Solicitors.
