Ward, R. v

An attempted robbery committed in a victim’s home is properly sentenced under the dwelling robbery guideline. Lawful entry and the absence of a break-in do not make it street robbery. The seriousness of the attempted robbery must be assessed separately, but the overall sentence must reflect connected offending and relevant aggravating features, including serious preceding violence, restraint, prevention of assistance, previous convictions and offending during a suspended sentence.

An unexplained and substantial reduction from the applicable guideline starting point may render a sentence unduly lenient. Full credit for a guilty plea remains available where appropriate.

The Solicitor General referred the offender’s sentences as unduly lenient under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

The offender had pleaded guilty at Sheffield Crown Court to causing grievous bodily harm contrary to section 20 of the Offences Against the Persons Act 1861 and attempted robbery. He had violently attacked a vulnerable victim in the victim’s home before demanding money while threatening him with a knife. The Recorder imposed concurrent sentences, producing a total of three years and four months’ imprisonment.

The central issue was whether the Recorder had applied the correct robbery guideline and whether the resulting sentence was unduly lenient.

1. The court granted leave and allowed the reference. The sentence was unduly lenient because the Recorder had applied the street and less sophisticated commercial robbery guideline to an attempted dwelling robbery.

2. The correct guideline was the dwelling robbery guideline. The offender had been invited into the home and had not entered intending to rob or assault the victim, but those features did not alter the character of the later attempted robbery as one committed in a dwelling. The Recorder had accepted in his note that he applied the wrong guideline.

3. Standing alone, the attempted robbery fell within category 2A. It was an attempt, and the serious brain injury had been caused by the preceding section 20 assault rather than the attempted robbery itself. The court nevertheless had to assess the overall criminality. It took account of the immediately preceding assault, the victim’s serious injury, the offender’s previous convictions, prevention of reporting or obtaining help, the extended restraint and bullying of the victim, and offending during a suspended sentence.

4. Those matters justified a sentence at the top of the category 2A range: ten years’ imprisonment before plea credit. Full credit for the guilty pleas reduced the sentence to six years and eight months.

5. The court substituted a sentence of six years and eight months’ imprisonment on the attempted robbery count for the sentence of three years and four months. The sentence on the section 20 count remained unaffected. Two months of the suspended sentence were ordered to be served concurrently.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division). On a reference by the Solicitor General under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988, the court granted leave and substituted a sentence of six years and eight months’ imprisonment: [2018] EWCA Crim 1985.

• Crown Court at Sheffield. The Recorder sentenced the offender on 13 April 2018 to concurrent terms of 20 months’ and 40 months’ imprisonment, producing a total of three years and four months.