F, R v

An appellate court will not interfere with a sentence unless it was wrong in principle or manifestly excessive. A guilty plea, contrition, youth, lack of previous convictions and evidence of rehabilitation may mitigate sentence, but they do not remove the need for proper punishment for a grave robbery involving violence, threats and racial abuse.

F, R v was an appeal against an 18-month detention and training order imposed after the 16-year-old appellant pleaded guilty at the first opportunity to robbery.

The appellant and a co-defendant, both of similar age, participated with a third unidentified girl in an evening attack on a lone victim. The victim was threatened with a broken bottle, knocked down, kicked, subjected to racial abuse and deprived of her handbag and personal items.

Although the appellant had no previous convictions, had expressed contrition and was said to have changed her behaviour after arrest, the issue was whether the sentence was manifestly excessive or wrong in principle.

1. Appeal dismissed. The 18-month detention and training order was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

2. The robbery was a grave and frightening group attack. It involved violence, a threat with a broken bottle, racial abuse, theft of the victim’s property and lasting fear for the victim when alone at night. The appellant had fully participated, although the court gave her the benefit of the doubt as to whether she personally held the bottle.

3. The court accepted the mitigating matters. The appellant had no previous convictions, pleaded guilty at the first opportunity, received proper credit for that plea, and appeared to have learned from the offence. Her contrition and claimed rehabilitation were relevant, but proper punishment remained necessary.

4. Since the sentence fell within the proper sentencing response to the seriousness of the offending, the court found no basis for appellate intervention. The sentence was therefore upheld.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): dismissed the appellant’s sentence appeal, brought with leave of the single judge, and upheld the 18-month detention and training order.
• Sentencing court: imposed an 18-month detention and training order following the appellant’s guilty plea to robbery. The lower court and judgment citation are not stated in the judgment.