Grant, R v

When fixing the minimum term for a mandatory life sentence under the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the court must apply the framework in Schedules 21 and 22. Where the case falls outside the specified categories in Schedule 21, the appropriate starting point is the statutory starting term. The court must then assess aggravating and mitigating features, while observing any applicable statutory ceiling. A previous judicial recommendation may cap the term available on review. Credit must be given for relevant time spent on remand.

The defendant was convicted of murder and conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm with intent. The murder arose from a pre-planned revenge attack directed at another person, but carried out at the wrong address against an innocent householder. The Court of Appeal Criminal Division had dismissed the defendant’s appeal against conviction on 27 October 2004. The court was required under paragraphs 3 and 6 of Schedule 22 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 to determine the minimum term, taking account of the statutory framework and the trial judge’s tariff recommendation.

1. The court determined the minimum term under Schedules 21 and 22 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, together with the relevant Lord Chief Justice’s guidance. The case did not fall within paragraph 4(1) or paragraph 5(1) of Schedule 21. The starting point was therefore 15 years.
2. The trial judge had recommended a tariff of 16 years. Applying paragraph 10(a) of Schedule 22, the court held that this recommendation formed the ceiling for the term which could be imposed on the review. The court relied on Sullivan, Gibbs, Elener & Elener [2005] 1 CAR(S) 67(308) in concluding that there was no reason to believe that the recommendation would have been increased by the Secretary of State.
3. The offence involved substantial aggravation, including pre-planning and premeditation, the intended commission of a further serious offence, the mistaken targeting of an entirely innocent person, and the killing in the victim’s home. No mitigation was apparent apart from the defendant’s age.
4. The appropriate term was 16 years, reduced by 11 months and 13 days spent on remand. The minimum term was therefore 15 years and 17 days. The court explained that release thereafter remained a matter for the Parole Board, subject to continued detention if necessary for public protection and lifelong licence conditions.

The judgment records that the defendant’s application for leave to appeal against conviction was referred to the full Court of Appeal Criminal Division and dismissed on 27 October 2004. The present judgment was a first-instance determination of the minimum term under Schedule 22 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.