Kee, R v

For sentencing under section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, serious and permanent injury and the use of a glass are grave aggravating features. They do not, however, automatically justify a starting point near the five-year maximum. The court must assess the absence of premeditation and the fact that the offence does not require an intention to cause the harm actually inflicted.

Where the offence more readily falls within the guideline category for particularly grave injury or use of a weapon, a sentence must reflect that category’s range. A full guilty-plea reduction and exceptionally strong personal mitigation may justify further reduction.

The appellant, a 29-year-old woman of previous good character, pleaded guilty at Manchester Crown Court to unlawful wounding contrary to section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. During an unpremeditated confrontation in a bar, while very drunk, she struck the victim twice in the face with an empty wine glass. He sustained serious permanent facial scarring and psychological harm.

The sentencing judge adopted a four-year post-trial starting point, reduced it for the guilty plea and personal mitigation, and imposed 30 months’ imprisonment. The appellant appealed against sentence, contending that the starting point was excessive and that the reduction for her mitigation was insufficient.

1. Appeal allowed. The sentence of 30 months’ imprisonment was reduced to 21 months.

2. The sentencing judge was entitled to regard the attack as vicious and unwarranted. Its serious and continuing physical, psychological, professional, domestic and social effects, together with the use of the glass twice, were substantial aggravating features.

3. Nevertheless, a four-year starting point after trial was excessive. An offence under section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 does not require an intention to cause the harm which occurred, and carries a maximum of five years. The attack was not premeditated. It did not readily fall within the highest guideline category, but more readily within the category of particularly grave injury or use of a weapon, for which the indicated range was 12 months’ to three years’ custody.

4. A proper post-trial starting point was three years. It should be reduced to two years for the guilty plea. The appellant’s previous good character, genuine remorse, low risk of reoffending and other particularly strong personal mitigation justified a further reduction to 21 months.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): allowed the appeal against sentence and substituted 21 months’ imprisonment.

• Manchester Crown Court: following a guilty plea to unlawful wounding contrary to section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, imposed 30 months’ imprisonment.