Gutierrez-Perez, R v

An appellate court will interfere with a sentence only where it is wrong in principle or manifestly excessive. In assessing a sentence for causing death by dangerous driving, the court must weigh all aggravating and mitigating features and apply the applicable sentencing guideline category. Conduct falling within Level One, the highest severity category, may justify a sentence at the higher end of the available range. Personal distress, remorse, previous good character and an early guilty plea may mitigate sentence, but do not require a reduction where the overall sentence properly reflects grave and multiple aggravating features.

The appellant pleaded guilty at the Crown Court at Snaresbrook to causing death by dangerous driving. She drove after consuming alcohol and sleeping tablets, despite warnings not to drive, and collided with a mother and child near a school. The child died from his injuries.

Judge King imposed seven years’ imprisonment, a ten-year driving disqualification, and an extended re-test requirement. The appellant appealed with leave, contending that insufficient weight had been given to mitigation, including remorse, previous good character, depression, personal difficulties and the later psychiatric report.

The central issue was whether the sentence was wrong in principle or manifestly excessive.

1. Appeal dismissed. The court held that the sentence of seven years’ imprisonment was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

2. The sentencing judge had correctly identified the six aggravating features: the appellant ignored warnings not to drive; drove persistently and dangerously; used an uninsured vehicle; knew of the defective tyre; had consumed alcohol and sleeping tablets so that her driving capacity was grossly impaired; and drove near a school at a time when vulnerable road users were likely to be present.

3. The judge had also taken account of mitigation, including previous good character, remorse, depression, broken relationships, the guilty plea and the appellant’s personal circumstances. The subsequent psychiatric report confirmed depression and alcohol dependency, but also confirmed that she had not been in non-insane automatism at the time of the collision.

4. Having considered the Sentencing Guidelines Council guidance on causing death by driving, the court concluded that the offending fell squarely within Level One, the highest category of offence severity. The applicable starting point and range therefore lay towards the longer end of the available sentencing range.

5. After balancing the aggravating and mitigating matters, including that this was a first offence and involved an early guilty plea, the court concluded that the original sentence was correct. The appeal was dismissed.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Appeal against sentence dismissed: [2009] EWCA Crim 2713.
• Crown Court at Snaresbrook: The appellant pleaded guilty to causing death by dangerous driving and was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment, disqualified from driving for ten years, and required to pass an extended driving test before driving again.