Attorney General's Reference No 10 of 2004

In sentencing for causing death by dangerous driving, exceptionally bad driving caused by hypoglycaemia may fall within the highest culpability category where the offender knowingly failed to manage an unstable diabetic condition before driving. The medical condition may explain the manner of driving, but it does not reduce culpability where the offender failed to take proper care to avoid the known risk to other road users.

Drugs which do not independently impair driving may nevertheless aggravate the offence when the offender knew that they would make management of that condition more difficult. The appropriate contested starting point was four to five years' imprisonment, subject to mitigation and credit for a guilty plea.

The Attorney General referred a sentence for causing death by dangerous driving under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

The offender, an insulin-dependent diabetic, drove while his diabetic control was unstable and after taking drugs. He suffered hypoglycaemia, drove dangerously, mounted the pavement and fatally injured a pedestrian. He had no valid driving licence or insurance and had his infant child in the vehicle.

At Reading Crown Court, the offender pleaded guilty and received eighteen months' imprisonment with a four-year driving disqualification. The issue was whether that sentence was unduly lenient.

1. The reference was allowed. The court granted leave, set aside the sentence of eighteen months' imprisonment and substituted two years' imprisonment. The four-year driving disqualification remained unaffected.

2. The driving was appalling. Hypoglycaemia explained why it occurred and therefore mitigated the seriousness of the driving in that limited sense. It did not materially reduce culpability because the offender had driven when he knew that his diabetic control was unstable and had failed to take proper care to ensure that driving did not create a substantial risk to others.

3. Applying the sentencing guidance in Cooksley and others and the Attorney-General's Reference No 152 of 2002 [2003] 2 Cr App R 18, the offence fell within the highest culpability category. In a contested case, the proper starting point was four to five years' imprisonment.

4. The drugs did not themselves create an additional risk of harm at the levels found. They were nevertheless relevant because the offender must have known that taking them would make diabetic management considerably more difficult. The court found it unnecessary to decide whether this engaged one or two of the aggravating features identified in Cooksley and others and the Attorney-General's Reference No 152 of 2002.

5. Allowing for genuine remorse, mitigation and full credit for the guilty plea, the appropriate first-instance sentence was two and a half to three years' imprisonment. Because the sentence was being reconsidered on an Attorney General's reference, the court applied the normal allowance for double jeopardy and imposed two years' imprisonment instead.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On the Attorney General's reference under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, the court granted leave, held the sentence unduly lenient, and substituted two years' imprisonment. The four-year driving disqualification was confirmed.
• Reading Crown Court: The offender pleaded guilty to causing death by dangerous driving and was sentenced to eighteen months' imprisonment with a four-year driving disqualification.