Gosling, R v

For manslaughter resulting from a single punch, sentence must reflect both the death caused and the offender’s culpability. Where death was an unforeseeable consequence, the sentence must remain proportionate to the offending conduct.

A guilty plea and absence of aggravating features ordinarily place such an offence at a 12-month starting point. Aggravating circumstances may justify a substantially longer term, potentially up to four years. Consistency is achieved through a flexible, rather than rigid, sentencing bracket.

The appellant pleaded guilty at Newcastle Crown Court to manslaughter after he punched a man who fell, struck his head on the pavement and later died from extensive skull fractures and brain injury.

He was sentenced to three years’ detention in a young offender institution. The judge gave full credit for the timely guilty plea and accepted the appellant’s remorse and favourable character evidence.

The appellant appealed on the ground that the sentence was manifestly excessive. He relied on the fact that there had been one punch, together with his plea, remorse, lack of previous violence and positive character references. The central issue was whether the three-year term lay outside the proper sentencing range for single-punch manslaughter.

1. Appeal dismissed. The three-year term of detention was at the upper end of the appropriate range, but was not manifestly excessive.

2. The court adopted the sentencing principles stated in R v Furby [2005] EWCA Crim 3147. Manslaughter sentencing must reflect both culpability and the death caused. A custodial sentence will usually follow, but the length of sentence must remain proportionate where an unlawful single punch produces a death that the offender could not reasonably have foreseen.

3. The court accepted the framework drawn together in R v Furby: the 12-month sentence in R v Coleman (1992) 13 Cr App R(S) 508 was the starting point for a guilty plea without aggravation, whereas aggravating circumstances could justify a sentence as high as four years. The individual circumstances determine the appropriate position within that range.

4. The court also adopted the approach in R v Roberts [2005] EWCA Crim 1305 that consistency in sentencing operates within a flexible and loose bracket. Here, the appellant had re-engaged after being led away, struck an unprovoked blow hard enough to floor a large victim, rejoiced when the victim fell, and soon afterwards acted aggressively again. Those matters justified placing the case near the top of the bracket.

5. The guilty plea, remorse, favourable references and absence of previous violence had been properly taken into account. The appellant’s prior offending nevertheless showed some tendency to excessive and unruly public behaviour. The sentence therefore stood.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — dismissed the appeal against sentence and upheld the three-year term of detention.
• Newcastle Crown Court — following a guilty plea to manslaughter on 9 November 2007, sentenced the appellant on 21 December 2007 to three years’ detention in a young offender institution.