Black, R v

On an appeal against sentence, a sentence is not manifestly excessive merely because it may properly be described as severe. Where the seriousness of reckless arson, including the danger posed to life and neighbouring property, places the sentence within the range supported by comparable appellate sentencing authorities, the appeal will be dismissed.

The appellant pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Maidstone to arson, being reckless as to whether life was endangered. He had set fire to a cushion in the living room of his semi-detached home while intoxicated, after threatening to burn down the house. The fire spread to the sofa and caused extensive damage before the emergency services removed him from the property and extinguished it.

Judge Joy imposed five years’ imprisonment. The appellant appealed, contending that the implied starting point was excessive when compared with two Attorney General’s References and R v Singh [2009] 1 Cr App R (S) 52. The issue was whether the five-year sentence was manifestly excessive.

1. Appeal dismissed. The sentence of five years’ imprisonment was not manifestly excessive.

2. The sentencing judge was entitled to treat the offence as extremely serious. The appellant deliberately started the fire in a living room adjoining a neighbouring semi-detached property. He intended to burn down the house, remained inside despite the fire and resisted removal. But for intervention by the fire service, the consequences would have been disastrous.

3. The judge had properly taken account of the guilty plea, psychiatric and pre-sentence material, remorse, alcohol misuse, lack of relevant convictions, and the assessment that the appellant did not present a significant risk to the public of serious harm through further such offending.

4. The Court considered the comparative sentencing material. The two Attorney General’s References supported a sentence at or around that imposed. Although five years could be viewed as severe, severity did not make it manifestly excessive.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): sentence appeal dismissed; the five-year sentence imposed by the Crown Court at Maidstone was upheld.
• Crown Court at Maidstone: on 13 May 2009, Judge Joy sentenced the appellant to five years’ imprisonment following a guilty plea to arson, being reckless as to whether life was endangered.