Blazys, R v

Where a serious affray involves a public, unprovoked and sustained group attack on an innocent person, an immediate custodial sentence may be necessary. On an appeal against sentence, however, the court must ensure that the pre-plea starting point is proportionate to the gravity of the particular offence. A spontaneous and unpremeditated affray causing only minor injury may justify a lower starting point despite its serious aggravating features. Voluntary intoxication which disinhibits violent conduct is an aggravating feature.

The appellant pleaded guilty in the magistrates’ court to affray and was committed to the Crown Court at Snaresbrook for sentence. He and three co-accused had carried out a sustained group assault on a man who had intervened after they approached a woman at a bus stop. The victim sustained minor cuts and inevitable bruising.

On 4 December 2007, the Crown Court imposed 12 months’ imprisonment. The appellant, who had no previous convictions and had entered an early guilty plea, appealed with leave against the length of that sentence. The central issue was whether the implied pre-plea starting point of 18 months was excessive.

1. Appeal allowed. The court quashed the sentence of 12 months’ imprisonment and substituted a sentence of eight months’ imprisonment.

2. Custody was plainly warranted. The affray was committed at night in a public place. It involved an unprovoked, sustained group attack on an innocent member of the public. The appellant’s heavy drinking and its disinhibiting effect were aggravating, not mitigating, features.

3. The appellant’s full credit for an early guilty plea meant that the 12-month sentence reflected a pre-plea starting point of 18 months. Although the sentencing judge had not expressly identified that starting point, the court accepted that this was its necessary implication.

4. The court considered that starting point too high. The violence was serious, but it was spontaneous and unpremeditated, and the sentence proceeded on the basis of minor injuries. The appellant’s good character, remorse, lack of previous custody and likely difficulty in prison through language problems were also relevant personal mitigation.

5. The court noted the general observation in R v Holmes and Holmes [1999] 2 Cr App R(S) 100 that the appellate question is whether a necessary custodial sentence can properly be shorter while remaining consonant with justice.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): By [2008] EWCA Crim 904, allowed the appeal against sentence, quashed the 12-month sentence and substituted eight months’ imprisonment.

• Crown Court at Snaresbrook: On 4 December 2007, imposed 12 months’ imprisonment for affray after committal from the magistrates’ court for sentence.