AB, R. v

For offenders aged 15 to 17, sentencing should reflect their reduced culpability. The Sentencing Council guideline gives a rough indication that the appropriate sentence may be between one-half and two-thirds of the equivalent adult sentence, after proper credit for a guilty plea and personal mitigation.

A Youth Court may commit a child or young person for sentence under the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 where the statutory conditions are met. A separate finding that the offences are grave crimes is not required for that committal route. Where the offender is aged 17 when sentenced, the appropriate custodial sentence is a detention and training order where the statutory requirements are met.

The appellant, AB, was aged 16 when he committed offences involving a knife, a Class A drug, an ammonia solution, and possession with intent to supply cocaine and heroin. He had no previous convictions.

After guilty pleas in the Youth Court, he was committed to the Crown Court at Northampton for sentence. The Recorder imposed concurrent sentences, with a global sentence of 36 months’ detention in a young offender institution for the two supply offences.

AB appealed against sentence. He contended that the Crown Court lacked power to exceed 24 months without a finding of grave crimes, and that the sentence gave insufficient allowance for his age and personal mitigation.

1. Appeal allowed. The court rejected the jurisdictional ground, but held that the 36-month sentence was manifestly excessive.

2. The Youth Court had correctly committed AB under section 3B of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. The cocaine and heroin supply offences fell within section 91, and section 5A(1) gave the Crown Court the sentencing powers available on an indictment. The associated offences were also properly committed under section 6. No finding that the offences were grave crimes was required.

3. The Recorder correctly assessed the supply offending as a significant role with category 3 harm. On the court’s assessment, an adult sentence after trial could properly have been six years after allowing for mitigation. An early guilty plea reduced that figure to four years.

4. The decisive error was the inadequate further reduction for AB’s age. For an offender aged 15 to 17, paragraph 6.4(6) of the Sentencing Council guideline gave a rough guide of one-half to two-thirds of the adult sentence. The four-year figure therefore required reduction to two years’ detention. The original 36-month term did not adequately reflect his reduced culpability as a 16-year-old.

5. As AB was aged 17 when sentenced, the appropriate sentence was a detention and training order under section 101 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. The court quashed the 36-month sentences for the supply offences and substituted concurrent 24-month detention and training orders. The concurrent sentences on the remaining counts remained unchanged in length, but were also detention and training orders.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Allowed AB’s appeal against sentence and substituted concurrent 24-month detention and training orders.
• Crown Court at Northampton: On 12 March 2018, imposed a global sentence of 36 months’ detention in a young offender institution.
• Youth Court: Following guilty pleas, committed AB to the Crown Court for sentence under the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000.