Nelson, R. v

For a repeat domestic burglary, the sentencing court should begin with the applicable burglary guideline before considering the statutory minimum sentence. Aggravating features may justify a starting point above the guideline range, but the court must avoid double counting. Under Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, section 111 permits credit for an early guilty plea, subject to the statutory restriction where the starting point is three years or thereabouts.

A defendant participating in the early guilty plea scheme should receive the full one-third reduction. On a sentence appeal, an excessive starting point may therefore require a limited reduction even where an immediate custodial sentence and a minimum sentence are justified.

The appellant pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Cardiff to a third domestic burglary. He entered the complainant's home at night through an open window, stole money, a handbag and keys, and caused her substantial distress and anxiety. He had a substantial criminal record, including earlier dwelling-house burglaries, and committed the offence while subject to licence supervision.

The Recorder imposed 42 months' imprisonment. The appellant appealed on the grounds that the starting point was too high or that he had received insufficient credit for his early guilty plea. The central issue was whether the sentence properly reflected the burglary guideline, the statutory minimum sentence and the full credit available under the early guilty plea scheme.

1. The appeal was allowed to a limited extent. The sentence of 42 months' imprisonment was reduced to 2 years and 10 months' imprisonment.
2. The court held that the correct approach was to start with the applicable burglary guideline, rather than with the minimum-sentence provisions. The guideline starting point was one year's custody, with a range from a high-level community order to two years' custody.
3. Section 111 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 applied because this was a third domestic burglary. It ordinarily imposed a minimum term of three years. It did not exclude a guilty-plea reduction, although where the starting point was three years or thereabouts the reduction had to leave a sentence of at least 80 per cent of that term.
4. The aggravating features justified a starting point above the guideline range. They included the appellant's repeat offending, the complainant's vulnerability and distress, the commission of the offence while on licence, and the length of his previous burglary sentence. The court nevertheless stressed the need to avoid double counting.
5. A full one-third reduction was due for the early guilty plea. The court regarded the Recorder's inferred starting point of five years and three months as too high. A starting point of four years and three months, reduced by one third, produced 2 years and 10 months. That sentence remained above the statutory 80 per cent limit, so no adjustment to the guilty-plea credit was required.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed the sentence appeal to a limited extent and substituted a sentence of 2 years and 10 months' imprisonment.
• Crown Court at Cardiff: On 16 August 2013, the appellant pleaded guilty to burglary and was sentenced by the Recorder to 42 months' imprisonment.