Gray, R v

[2008] EWCA Crim 336

Case details

Case citations
[2008] EWCA Crim 336
Court
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Judgment date
4 February 2008
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Criminal Sentencing Dangerous driving
Keywords
dangerous driving sentencing appeal serious personal injury custodial sentence guilty plea remorse youth sentencing delay driving disqualification
Outcome
appeal allowed (sentence reduced from 13 months’ detention to eight months’ detention)
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

When sentencing for dangerous driving, the court may give substantial weight to the consequences for the victim. Exceptionally grave injuries may make custody necessary even where the criminality of the driving is towards the lower end of the scale. The sentence must nevertheless reflect the offence itself and must be proportionate after mitigation, including a guilty plea, remorse, youth, good character and delay not attributable to the offender, has been weighed against the harm caused.

Factual background

The appellant pleaded guilty at Doncaster Crown Court to dangerous driving after his car crossed the centre line and collided with a motorcycle. The motorcyclist suffered catastrophic and permanent injuries, including an above-knee amputation.

The Crown Court imposed 13 months’ detention, a two-year driving disqualification and a requirement to pass an extended retest. The appellant appealed against sentence, contending that the term was manifestly excessive in light of the relatively lower-level driving and the available mitigation.

Held

  1. The appeal was allowed to the limited extent of reducing the detention term from 13 months to eight months.

  2. The court held that the sentencing judge was entitled to take account of the appalling and permanent consequences for the motorcyclist. Although the dangerous driving was at the lower end of the scale of criminality, it was a bad piece of driving and the injuries made a custodial sentence necessary.

  3. The sentence had to punish the dangerous driving rather than simply its consequences. The court therefore balanced the exceptional harm against the appellant’s guilty plea, remorse, youth, lack of previous convictions, good driving record and the delay for which he was not responsible.

  4. Having regard in particular to Stokes [1998] 1 Cr.App.R 282 and Stevens [2003] EWCA Crim. 2823, 13 months’ detention was out of line with authority. An eight-month term properly reflected the difficult balance between the gravity of the consequences and the mitigation.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Appellate history

  • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed the appeal against sentence to the limited extent of substituting eight months’ detention for 13 months.
  • Doncaster Crown Court: Following a guilty plea to dangerous driving, imposed 13 months’ detention, disqualification from driving for two years and until an extended test was passed.

Lower court decision

Judgment appealed:
Not stated in the judgment
Outcome:
appeal allowed (sentence reduced from 13 months’ detention to eight months’ detention)

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.