Cox, R. v

For a serious offence of managing a brothel, a sentence within the applicable guideline range will not be interfered with merely because imprisonment bears heavily on an elderly offender in poor health. The sentencing court may properly treat the scale, profitability, duration, record-keeping, advertising and sophistication of the operation as substantial aggravating features. Personal mitigation, a guilty plea, absence of previous convictions, low risk of reoffending and medical conditions remain material, but do not require suspension of a custodial sentence where the offending is sufficiently serious.

The appellant pleaded guilty to managing a brothel and was sentenced on 6 March 2009 to 14 months’ imprisonment. A confiscation order was also made, but the appeal concerned imprisonment only.

For about two years, the appellant ran an apparent escort agency from his home which operated as a brothel. The operation involved many adult women and clients, generated substantial profits, and used records and advertising. There was no suggestion of coercion or compulsion. The appellant was 72, had no previous convictions, had medical difficulties and a low assessed risk of reoffending.

The central issue was whether the custodial term was excessive or should have been suspended.

1. Appeal dismissed. The Court held that immediate custody was appropriate for the offending and that the 14-month term was within the proper sentencing range.

2. The relevant Sentencing Guideline Council guidance gave a starting point of 12 months’ custody, with a range from 26 weeks to two years, where there was no coercion or corruption but the offender was closely involved in prostitution. The appellant’s managerial role placed the case within that description.

3. The Court gave weight to mitigation. The appellant was entitled to full credit for his guilty plea. He had no previous convictions, a low risk of reoffending, age-related and other medical difficulties, and had remained on bail during a lengthy period before sentence.

4. Those matters did not outweigh the seriousness of the operation. Its scale, the number of women involved, substantial profitability, duration, record-keeping, advertising and marked sophistication were serious aggravating features. The fact that the business was managed from the appellant’s home also formed part of the assessment.

5. Although imprisonment was severe for a 72-year-old man in poor health, the sentence was not outside the range properly open to the sentencing judge. There was therefore no basis to reduce or suspend it.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — dismissed the appeal against sentence: [2009] EWCA Crim 1063.

• Sentencing court — imposed 14 months’ imprisonment on 6 March 2009 following a guilty plea to managing a brothel. The court and citation are not stated in the judgment.