Bateman, R. v

Where a magistrates' court commits an offender to the Crown Court for breach of a Crown Court suspended sentence under Schedule 12, and also commits associated offences under section 6(2), the Crown Court's sentencing powers for the associated offences remain limited by section 7(1) to the powers of the magistrates' court. Section 7(2) does not remove that limit. It concerns a committal under section 6 in respect of a suspended sentence imposed by the magistrates' court.

The court should also give credit for unpaid work completed under a suspended sentence when deciding whether to activate its custodial element.

These conjoined sentence appeals concerned offenders who committed further offences during the operational periods of suspended sentences imposed by the Crown Court. In each case, the magistrates committed the offender to the Crown Court under paragraph 11(2) of Schedule 12 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003 to deal with the suspended sentence. They also committed the fresh offences under section 6(2) of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000.

At Teesside, Bateman received consecutive sentences for four assaults in addition to activation of his suspended sentence. At Liverpool, Doyle received a consecutive 12-month sentence for producing cannabis, as well as activation of his suspended sentence. The central issue was whether the Crown Court had unrestricted sentencing powers for the fresh offences because the offenders had also been committed for breach of Crown Court suspended sentences.

1. The appeals were allowed in part. The Crown Court had imposed unlawful sentences for the associated offences because its powers in respect of those offences were confined to the powers of the magistrates' court.

2. Section 6 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 permits the magistrates' court, when making a primary committal, to send associated offences to the Crown Court so that all outstanding matters can be dealt with together. Section 7(1) protects an offender from a greater sentence on an associated offence merely because that practical course has been taken. Unless the magistrates have committed the offender for sentence under section 3, the Crown Court may impose only the sentence which the magistrates could have imposed.

3. Section 7(2) had to be read as an exception within the scheme of section 7, which concerns committals under section 6. A committal to deal with breach of a suspended sentence imposed by the Crown Court is made under paragraph 11(2)(a) of Schedule 12 to the Criminal Justice Act 2003, not under section 6. The reference in section 7(2) to a committal under section 6 in respect of a suspended sentence therefore concerns a suspended sentence imposed by the magistrates' court. It does not disapply section 7(1) for fresh associated offences committed under section 6(2).

4. Bateman's aggregate 20-month sentence for the four assaults exceeded the six-month magistrates' court maximum under section 133 of the Magistrates' Courts Act 1980. It was quashed and replaced by concurrent five-month sentences. The activation order remained, producing a total of 17 months' detention.

5. Doyle's 12-month sentence for producing cannabis likewise exceeded the six-month limit. It was replaced by four months. The court also gave him credit for completing the unpaid-work requirement of his suspended sentence, consistently with R v Zeca [2009] EWCA Crim 133, and reduced the activated term to six months. His total sentence became 10 months' imprisonment.

6. Magistrates should consider carefully whether section 3 or section 6 is the proper committal power and should state and record their choice clearly.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed both sentence appeals in part and substituted lawful sentences.
• Crown Court at Teesside: The Recorder of Middlesbrough activated Bateman's suspended sentence and imposed consecutive sentences for four assaults, producing 32 months' detention.
• Crown Court at Liverpool: His Honour Judge Lewis activated Doyle's suspended sentence and imposed consecutive sentences for the fresh offences, producing two years' imprisonment.