Stevenson, R v

For the purpose of fixing a minimum term for murder, a mental disorder arising from substance misuse is mitigating only if it lowers the offender’s degree of culpability. Youth and an absence of intent to kill may also be relevant mitigation, but must be assessed against the gravity of the intended violence and the offender’s recklessness as to a fatal result.

Applying Criminal Justice Act 2003, Schedule 21, a minimum term may be unduly lenient where a deliberate burglary of a vulnerable victim’s home culminates in sustained and exceptionally savage violence, with no genuine remorse and no culpability-reducing impairment.

The Attorney General applied under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to refer as unduly lenient the minimum term imposed on Michael Stevenson following his conviction for murder at Newcastle Crown Court.

The trial judge had imposed life imprisonment with a 20-year minimum term. The victim, an 89-year-old man living alone, was targeted in his home for money and was subjected to a sustained, fatal attack. The offender relied on his youth, lack of intent to kill, and mental disorder associated with crack cocaine and alcohol misuse.

The central issue was whether, applying Schedule 21 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003, those matters justified the 20-year minimum term.

1. The Attorney General’s reference was allowed. The court granted leave under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, quashed the 20-year minimum-term order, and substituted a minimum term of 25 years’ imprisonment.

2. The sentencing judge was entitled to treat the absence of an intention to kill as potentially mitigating. It did not, however, materially reduce the seriousness of this murder. The offender deliberately targeted a frail and vulnerable elderly man in his home in order to steal, then inflicted numerous grave injuries with sustained ferocity. He intended injuries of the gravest kind and was reckless whether the attack would prove fatal.

3. The offender’s age and substance-related mental disorder did not lower his culpability. Under section 269(5) and paragraph 11(c) of Schedule 21 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the relevant question was whether the disorder reduced culpability. The psychiatric evidence showed no substantial impairment of mental responsibility. The offender knew why he had entered the house and knew what he was doing; he did not act through immaturity or because of the self-inflicted disorder.

4. The deliberate burglary, selection of a vulnerable victim, extreme and prolonged violence, previous pattern of targeting elderly people, absence of genuine remorse, and callous conduct immediately after the attack made the statutory assessment clear. Applying the Schedule 21 criteria, the court held that the 20-year minimum term was not merely lenient but unduly lenient.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On an Attorney General’s reference under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, the court granted leave, quashed the 20-year minimum-term order and substituted 25 years: [2009] EWCA Crim 2344.

• Newcastle Crown Court: On 11 March 2009, following conviction for murder, Walker J imposed life imprisonment with a minimum term of 20 years.