Bidmead, R. v

When fixing the minimum term for imprisonment for public protection, the court should assess the appropriate notional determinate sentence on the particular facts, make the appropriate allowance for a guilty plea, and derive the minimum custodial period accordingly. Sentencing ranges in definitive guidance may be broad. Comparable offending may assist, but each case turns on its own facts.

The appellant pleaded guilty at Derby Crown Court to specimen offences of sexual activity with a 14-year-old child and to possessing indecent photographs of a child or young person. He had exercised control over a vulnerable child during repeated sexual activity and had relevant previous convictions.

The Crown Court imposed imprisonment for public protection with a five-year minimum term, together with a concurrent 18-month extended sentence for the photograph offences. By leave granted out of time, the appellant challenged only the minimum term. The appeal followed a reduction in the sentence imposed on his co-accused.

1. Appeal allowed to a limited extent. The five-year minimum term imposed for imprisonment for public protection was reduced to four years. All other orders stood.
2. The court accepted that the trial judge had proceeded from a notional determinate sentence of 15 years after trial, producing a 10-year sentence after credit for the guilty plea and a five-year minimum term. That assessment was too high.
3. The offending was grave. It involved repeated sexual activity with a vulnerable 14-year-old whom the appellant had brought under his controlling influence. The appellant also had a substantial history of sexual offending against children. Those features justified a significantly higher sentence than that appropriate for his co-accused.
4. However, the co-accused’s appeal provided assistance as to the proper sentencing range, while the definitive guideline range was deliberately broad and each case remained fact-sensitive. The appropriate notional determinate sentence after trial was about 12 years. Applying the normal guilty-plea reduction produced an eight-year determinate equivalent and therefore a four-year minimum term.
5. The minimum term did not determine the appellant’s eventual release date. The length of detention after expiry of that term remained a matter for review in the usual way.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed the sentence appeal to the extent of reducing the minimum term from five years to four years: [2009] EWCA Crim 1799.
• Crown Court at Derby: Imposed imprisonment for public protection with a five-year minimum term, and a concurrent 18-month extended sentence for possessing indecent photographs. No citation was stated.