Rennison, R. v

A custodial sentence is not completed when an offender is released halfway through it on post-custodial licence. Accordingly, time spent on remand equivalent to at least half of the maximum custodial sentence does not make it wrong in principle to impose a community order with requirements for an offence under section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986.

The sentencing court must take the remand period into account. Where it has imposed a reduced non-custodial sentence to reflect that period, further community requirements may be justified by the seriousness of the offending and the offender’s record.

The appellant pleaded guilty at Leeds Crown Court to using threatening behaviour, contrary to section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986. The offence arose from threats made towards a complainant during a sensitive sexual-offence trial involving a member of the appellant’s family.

On 10 April 2018, the judge imposed a 12-month community order with rehabilitation activity and unpaid work requirements. The appellant had spent three months and 13 days on remand. He appealed, contending that the requirements were wrong in principle because the remand period exceeded the custodial equivalent of half the six-month statutory maximum, or that the sentence was manifestly excessive.

1. Appeal dismissed. The community order, including its rehabilitation activity and unpaid work requirements, was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.
2. A six-month custodial sentence for an offence under section 4 of the Public Order Act 1986 is not exhausted at the halfway point. Release at that point is on post-custodial licence, so the sentence remains unexpired. It was therefore a misconception to treat remand time equivalent to half the maximum term as precluding a subsequent non-custodial sentence.
3. The sentencing judge had expressly allowed for the three months and 13 days spent on remand. Although she had contemplated a suspended custodial sentence because of the offence’s seriousness, she imposed the lesser community order in recognition of that remand period. The Court followed the approach in R v Sutherland [2017] EWCA Crim 2259 and rejected the appellant’s argument based on principle.
4. The sentence was also justified on its merits. The threats were made in the context of a sensitive trial and had the potential to disrupt the course of justice. The appellant’s extensive and relevant criminal record further supported the requirements imposed. The order could not properly be described as manifestly excessive.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): In [2018] EWCA Crim 2447, dismissed the appeal against sentence.
• Crown Court at Leeds: On 10 April 2018, imposed a 12-month community order with 15 rehabilitation activity days and 100 hours’ unpaid work following a guilty plea to a section 4 public-order offence.