Bulmer, R. v

When sentencing breaches of an Anti-Social Behaviour Order, the court may take account of the need to protect the public from recurrent disorderly conduct. However, the sentence must remain proportionate to the culpability represented by the breaches. A hope that further custody may improve an offender’s prospects of rehabilitation cannot justify a term of imprisonment that exceeds those bounds.

The appellant, a chronic alcoholic with numerous alcohol-related convictions and previous breaches of Anti-Social Behaviour Orders, admitted two further breaches of an order made in December 2004. The incidents involved drunken, abusive and disorderly conduct in York shortly after her release from a 28-day sentence for an earlier breach.

At the Crown Court at York, Judge Hoffman imposed concurrent sentences of 21 months’ imprisonment. The appellant appealed on the ground that the overall sentence was manifestly excessive and disproportionate to the conduct constituting the two breaches.

1. Appeal against sentence allowed. The concurrent sentences of 21 months’ imprisonment were reduced to concurrent sentences of 12 months’ imprisonment.
2. The Court accepted that the sentencing judge faced a difficult balance. The appellant’s persistent alcohol-related offending and apparent inability to avoid disorder outside custody made protection of the public a proper sentencing consideration.
3. That consideration did not displace proportionality. The two admitted breaches were comparatively minor, and the term imposed was out of proportion to the culpability involved in them.
4. The judge may have intended that a longer period in custody would improve the appellant’s prospects of remaining abstinent after release. Although that aim was laudable, it could not support a sentence beyond the bounds of proportionality for the offences being sentenced.
5. A term of 12 months’ imprisonment for each breach, to run concurrently, was a proportionate disposition while still recognising the need to protect the public from recurrent disorderly conduct.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed the appeal against sentence and substituted concurrent sentences of 12 months’ imprisonment.
• Crown Court at York: Judge Hoffman imposed concurrent sentences of 21 months’ imprisonment for two admitted breaches of an Anti-Social Behaviour Order.