McGuiness, R v

Where an offender is committed to the Crown Court for sentence for an either-way offence under section 3 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, and a summary offence is also committed under section 6, section 7(1) limits the aggregate custodial sentence for the summary offences to six months. It does not require that limit to include the sentence imposed for the either-way offence.

The Crown Court may therefore order a sentence for a summary offence to run consecutively to a sentence for the either-way offence, even though the combined total exceeds the magistrates’ sentencing limit.

The applicant pleaded guilty in the magistrates’ court to handling stolen goods and driving while disqualified. Handling was triable either way; driving while disqualified was triable summarily. The magistrates committed the handling offence to the Crown Court for sentence under section 3 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 and committed the summary offence under section 6.

At Reading Crown Court, the applicant received 15 months’ imprisonment for handling and six months for driving while disqualified, ordered consecutively, making 21 months. The sentencing judge confirmed the order after receiving submissions that it was unlawful. The renewed application for leave to appeal raised whether section 7(1), read with section 133 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, prevented that consecutive order.

1. The renewed application was dismissed. The Crown Court had power to impose six months’ imprisonment for the summary offence consecutively to the 15-month sentence for the either-way offence.
2. Section 3 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 permits committal of an either-way offence where the magistrates consider that a punishment greater than their powers should be imposed. By section 5(1), the Crown Court may deal with that offence as if the offender had been convicted on indictment.
3. Where a related summary offence is committed under section 6, section 7(1) confines the Crown Court to the sentencing powers which the magistrates would have had in respect of that summary offence. Read with section 133 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980, it limits the aggregate sentence for summary offences so committed to six months.
4. That restriction does not govern whether the summary sentence is consecutive to, or concurrent with, the sentence for the either-way offence. A contrary construction would usually prevent any additional penalty for the summary offence, because an offence committed under section 3 will commonly merit a sentence exceeding the magistrates’ six-month limit.
5. The earlier decisions in Cattell (1986) 8 Cr.App.R (S) 268 and Whitlock (1992) 13 Cr.App.R (S) 157 supported that construction. The 21-month total was therefore lawful.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): The renewed application for leave to appeal was dismissed in [2003] EWCA Crim 419. The court upheld the consecutive sentences imposed by the Crown Court.
• Reading Crown Court: On 7 June 2002, Judge Playford QC imposed 15 months’ imprisonment for handling stolen goods and six months for driving while disqualified, consecutively. On 14 June 2002, he confirmed that sentence after further argument.
• Magistrates’ Court: Following guilty pleas, the magistrates committed the either-way handling offence for sentence under section 3 and the summary driving offence under section 6 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000.