Diamond, R v

[2009] EWCA Crim 2193

Case details

Case citations
[2009] EWCA Crim 2193
Court
Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Judgment date
12 October 2009
Judgment text

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Subjects
Criminal Sentencing Burglary sentencing
Keywords
domestic burglary sentence appeal Sentencing Guidelines limited raised culpability and/or impact timely guilty plea credit for time on remand manifestly excessive sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed; sentence quashed and 12 months’ imprisonment substituted
Judicial consideration

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Summary

For domestic burglary sentencing, the applicable guideline category and range must be observed. Where the offence falls within the middle category of limited raised culpability and/or impact, the post-trial starting range is 9 to 18 months. A defendant’s record and the damage caused may justify a sentence towards the top of that range, but do not justify a sentence appropriate only to cases of extreme culpability. A timely guilty plea must receive proper credit.

Factual background

The appellant pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Lewes to burglary of a dwelling. The flat had been broken into, ransacked and property worth just over £2,000 stolen. He was sentenced to three years’ imprisonment.

He appealed, with leave of the single judge, on the ground that the sentence was manifestly excessive and outside the relevant burglary guideline range. The issue was whether the offending, including the appellant’s record and the damage caused, warranted that sentence.

Held

  1. Appeal allowed. The court quashed the three-year sentence and substituted 12 months’ imprisonment, with credit for time spent in custody before sentence.

  2. The sentencing judge correctly placed the offence in the middle category of limited raised culpability and/or impact under R v Saw & Ors [2009] EWCA Crim 1. The general post-trial range for that category was 9 to 18 months.

  3. The appellant’s record, the value of the loss and the damage to the flat justified locating the case towards the top of that bracket. However, he was neither a repeat nor a prolific dwelling burglar. There was no evidence of trauma beyond the ordinary consequences of an intrusion into a home, and none of the further aggravating features identified in Saw was present.

  4. A three-year sentence, reached after allowing credit for a timely guilty plea, necessarily proceeded from a starting point beyond the guideline range reserved for even the most serious cases unless there was extreme culpability. That was not warranted on these facts. Proper allowance for the timely plea produced a sentence of 12 months.

The court’s approach to earlier authorities

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Appellate history

  • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed the appeal against sentence and substituted 12 months’ imprisonment.
  • Crown Court at Lewes: On 8 May 2008, following a guilty plea to burglary, imposed three years’ imprisonment.

Lower court decision

Judgment appealed:
Not stated in the judgment
Outcome:
appeal allowed; sentence quashed and 12 months’ imprisonment substituted

Key cases cited

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.

Cases citing this case

This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.