M, R. v

A sentence of detention under Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, section 91, may be appropriate for a very young offender whose repeated, similar and serious offending has continued after several detention and training orders and shortly after release from custody. The sentencing court must nevertheless give substantial weight to extreme youth and the offender’s personal mitigation.

In assessing robbery, relevant aggravating features may include joint participation, pre-planning, offending at night and disguise. The absence of a weapon and limited personal violence remain mitigating factors. The proper term must reflect both public protection and the offender’s age.

The appellant, aged 15, pleaded guilty at Coventry Crown Court to two robberies and one attempted robbery. The offences involved the joint taking or attempted taking of mobile telephones from young people at night. He had a serious record for his age, including previous robberies and detention and training orders, and committed the present offences shortly after release.

He received concurrent sentences of three years’ detention under section 91 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. He appealed against sentence with leave, contending that the term was excessive in light of his age, guilty pleas and the robbery sentencing guideline. The issue was whether a section 91 sentence, and if so what length, was appropriate.

1. Appeal allowed in part. The court held that a sentence under section 91 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 was appropriate. The appellant’s multiple and persistent offences were similar in nature, followed three detention and training orders, and were committed shortly after release and while he was in breach of earlier orders.

2. The court had regard to the guidance in R v Fairhurst [1986] 1 WLR 1374, R v Mills [1998] 2 Cr App R(S) 128 and R v Brown [1999] 1 Cr App R(S) 132 concerning the use of section 91. A detention and training order was not an adequate response to this persistent offending.

3. The robbery sentencing guideline’s aggravating features were present: there was more than one offender, some pre-planning, offending at night, and, in one instance, disguise. The public required protection. However, the appellant’s extreme youth, limited personal use of violence and absence of a weapon required a lower term than that imposed.

4. The concurrent three-year sentences were quashed and concurrent sentences of 27 months’ detention under section 91 were substituted.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed the appeal against sentence to the extent of reducing the concurrent section 91 sentences from three years to 27 months.

• Crown Court at Coventry: Following guilty pleas to two robberies and attempted robbery, imposed concurrent three-year sentences of detention under section 91 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000.