Crees, R. v

When fixing the minimum term for imprisonment for public protection, the sentencing court must reflect the total criminality of all offences being sentenced. It should not use consecutive indeterminate sentences to achieve that result. Where the conditions in section 227 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 are met for specified non-serious offences, the court must impose extended sentences, even where their custodial terms run concurrently with the IPP minimum term. An appellate court may correct an omitted mandatory sentence if total custody is not increased. A severe sentence does not justify intervention unless it is manifestly excessive after proper credit for guilty pleas and totality.

The appellant pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Cardiff to eight offences committed on four occasions while on bail. They included robbery, attempted robbery, wounding with intent, unlawful wounding, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, affrays and possession of an offensive weapon.

On 19 January 2007, the Recorder imposed imprisonment for public protection under section 225 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 for three offences, with a minimum term of four years and six months. No order was made for four further specified offences. The appellant challenged the sentence as manifestly excessive for insufficient credit for guilty pleas and totality. The Full Court also raised questions about calculating the IPP minimum term and the consequences of failing to sentence the remaining specified offences.

1. Appeal dismissed. The court nevertheless corrected the sentence by imposing concurrent extended sentences for the specified offences for which the Recorder had made no order.
2. For an IPP, the notional determinate sentence, and therefore the minimum term, must reflect the total criminality of all offences before the sentencing court. The court followed the approach in R v O'Brien [2007] 1 Cr App R(S) 75, reinforced by the applicable sentencing guideline. Other imprisonment should be concurrent with the IPP, while the notional determinate term is increased to reflect the overall criminality.
3. Sections 227(1) and (2) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 applied to the unlawful wounding, assault occasioning actual bodily harm and two affrays. The Recorder could not make no order for those specified offences. The court imposed an extended sentence of two years, comprising 12 months' custody and 12 months' licence, for each such offence, concurrent with the IPP minimum term. This complied with the statutory scheme and did not offend section 11 of the Criminal Appeal Act, because it did not increase total custody.
4. The Recorder had explained how the nine-year notional determinate sentence was calculated and had allowed for guilty pleas and totality. The offending involved escalating violence, robberies and knife wounding over a short period while the appellant was on bail. Although the sentence was severe and perhaps high, it was not manifestly excessive. The court therefore declined to interfere with the IPP minimum term.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Appeal dismissed. The court imposed concurrent extended sentences to correct the absence of orders for specified offences.
• Crown Court at Cardiff: On 19 January 2007, the Recorder imposed an IPP under section 225 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, with a minimum term of four years and six months, for robbery, attempted robbery and wounding with intent.