Broadbent, R v

Where offences are committed to the Crown Court for sentence under section 6 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, the aggregate custodial sentence for those offences must not exceed the sentencing power available in the magistrates’ court.

On an appeal against sentence, the overall term must be assessed for totality. A sentence at the upper end of the appropriate range is not manifestly excessive where separate offences, committed while on bail, involve persistent offending, violence towards police officers and possession of a knife.

The appellant pleaded guilty in the magistrates’ court to theft, theft from a motor vehicle, racially aggravated public-order offences, assaulting a constable, and possessing a bladed article. He was committed to the Crown Court at Preston and, on 7 August 2017, received consecutive and concurrent sentences totalling 28 months’ imprisonment.

He appealed against sentence. The appeal raised whether the aggregate sentences for three offences committed under section 6 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 exceeded the Crown Court’s available sentencing power, and whether the overall sentence was excessive on the ground of totality.

1. Appeal allowed to a limited extent. The aggregate sentence for the three offences committed for sentence under section 6 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 was seven months’ imprisonment. It exceeded the six-month maximum available for those offences. The relevant sentences had therefore to be quashed and replaced with lawful terms.

2. The court rejected the wider totality challenge. The offences occurred on three separate days. The appellant committed later offences while on police bail. The assaultive conduct towards police officers involved violence, biting, spitting and racial abuse in public. Ten days later, while again on bail, he possessed a knife in public and behaved aggressively towards officers.

3. The appellant’s extensive record showed that previous community and suspended sentence orders had not curtailed his offending. Although 28 months was at the upper end of the appropriate totality range, it was not manifestly excessive.

4. The court substituted two months’ consecutive imprisonment for the first theft; two months’ concurrent imprisonment for the second theft; and two months’ consecutive imprisonment for assaulting a constable. The concurrent 12-month sentences for the racially aggravated offences and the consecutive nine-month sentence for possessing a bladed article remained. The total sentence was reduced to 25 months’ imprisonment.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed the sentence appeal to the limited extent required by the statutory sentencing limit, reducing the total term from 28 to 25 months’ imprisonment.
• Crown Court at Preston: On 7 August 2017, imposed sentences totalling 28 months’ imprisonment following committal from the magistrates’ court.
• Lancashire Magistrates’ Court sitting at Preston: On 5 July 2017, accepted guilty pleas and committed the appellant to the Crown Court for sentence.