Green, R v

[2008] EWCA Crim 2514

Case details

Case citations
[2008] EWCA Crim 2514
Court
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Judgment date
16 October 2008
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Criminal Sentencing Unduly lenient sentences
Keywords
Attorney General’s reference unduly lenient sentence youth offender wounding with intent knife crime detention and training order section 91 serious aggravating features
Outcome
attorney general’s reference allowed; sentence increased from two to four years’ detention and training
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

Where a young offender deliberately obtains a knife after a trivial dispute, returns to confront the victim and inflicts a near-fatal wound on a defenceless person, the offending may be sufficiently grave to require detention under section 91 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. Youth, good character and an early guilty plea remain important mitigation, but they may not prevent a substantial custodial sentence where the attack was planned, deliberate and caused serious lasting harm.

Factual background

The Attorney General referred, under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, a two-year detention and training order imposed at Bolton Crown Court for wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

The 15-year-old offender reacted to an accidental bump on a bus by going home, taking a hunting knife, returning to find the 16-year-old victim and stabbing him through the thigh while he lay defenceless. The wound narrowly missed the femoral artery and caused continuing injury.

The central question was whether the sentencing judge’s order was unduly lenient despite the offender’s youth, good character and guilty plea.

Held

  1. Reference allowed and sentence increased. The court granted leave and concluded that the two-year detention and training order was unduly lenient. It substituted four years’ detention and training.

  2. The sentencing judge’s analysis of aggravating and mitigating circumstances was not criticised. The error lay in the sentence ultimately imposed after that analysis.

  3. The offender’s youth, lack of previous convictions and guilty plea were substantial mitigation. The court also took account of the delay in sentencing and the favourable material concerning his background, conduct in custody and expressed regret.

  4. Those matters were outweighed by the exceptional gravity of the offence. Following a trivial perceived insult, the offender deliberately went home, armed himself with a hunting knife, returned with his brother, found the victim and attacked him. The victim was pulled to the ground and stabbed while defenceless. The injury was close to fatal and caused continuing disability.

  5. The offender’s age did not remove the conclusion that he knew what he was doing and acted deliberately. The court held that the sentencing judge should have exercised the powers under section 91 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. A four-year sentence was required notwithstanding the guilty plea. The section 39 reporting restriction was lifted.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Appellate history

  • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On an Attorney General’s reference under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, the court held that the sentence was unduly lenient and substituted four years’ detention and training.
  • Crown Court at Bolton: On 24 June 2008, imposed a two-year detention and training order following the offender’s guilty plea to wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

Lower court decision

Judgment appealed:
Not stated in the judgment
Outcome:
attorney general’s reference allowed; sentence increased from two to four years’ detention and training

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.