Beadell, R. v

Credit for time spent in custody on remand is not automatically deducted from a murder minimum term under Criminal Justice Act 2003, section 240 ZA. Where the sentencing judge clearly intended to allow that credit but the order fails to do so, the appellate court may correct the technical error by quashing and substituting the minimum term to reflect the intended deduction.

The applicant was convicted of murder at Chester Crown Court on 16 July 2014 and received life imprisonment with a minimum term of 27 years. His application for leave to appeal against sentence was referred to the full court to correct a technical error in the sentencing order.

The sentencing remarks showed that the judge intended to credit 261 days spent on remand. The order made did not give effect to that intention.

1. Appeal allowed. The court granted leave and an extension of time because the application was referred for correction of a technical matter.
2. Time spent on remand is not automatically deducted from a murder minimum term under section 240 ZA of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, unlike time served under an ordinary custodial sentence.
3. The sentencing judge had plainly intended to allow credit for 261 days spent in custody on remand. The final order failed to record that intention.
4. The court therefore quashed the minimum term of 27 years and substituted a minimum term of 27 years less 261 days.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): allowed the sentence appeal to correct the omission of remand credit from the minimum-term order.
• Crown Court at Chester: convicted the applicant of murder on 16 July 2014 and imposed life imprisonment with a minimum term of 27 years.