Tallis, R v

In sentencing a participant in a group assault, the court may treat the violence as a joint assault where the offender did not distance himself from the acts of the others and personally joined attacks on a helpless victim. Seriousness under the assault guidelines is assessed by harm caused and harm intended. A sustained group attack on a vulnerable victim, involving punches and kicks with shod feet, may properly fall within category 1.

A custodial sentence imposed on a young first-time offender will not be manifestly excessive merely because substantial personal mitigation is present. The sentencing judge may conclude that immediate custody is necessary after balancing that mitigation, delay and the seriousness of the offending.

R v Tallis was an appeal against a sentence of 12 months’ youth detention imposed at Chester Crown Court following the appellant’s guilty plea to assault occasioning actual bodily harm contrary to section 47 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

The appellant and four others had taken part in assaults on a 16-year-old victim during the early hours of 9 March 2017. The victim later died from drug toxicity, but the sentencing judge found that the assaults had not caused his death. The appellant, then 18, punched the victim while he was on the ground on two occasions.

The appeal challenged the immediate custodial sentence as excessive, relying on the appellant’s lesser role, personal mitigation, difficult upbringing, mental-health difficulties, progress and the delay before sentence.

1. Appeal dismissed. The sentence of 12 months’ youth detention was not manifestly excessive, and the judge was entitled to impose it immediately.

2. The sentencing judge was entitled to regard the assault as a joint assault carried out in furtherance of a common criminal enterprise. The appellant never distanced himself from the violence. He joined in twice by punching the victim while he lay helpless on the ground.

3. There was no material sentencing disparity by comparison with the two offenders dealt with in the youth court. They were subject to a different sentencing regime because they were under 18.

4. Under the section 47 assault guidelines, seriousness required consideration of both intended and actual harm. The offence was properly assessed as category 1. It involved a sustained group attack on a vulnerable victim, with punches and kicks including kicks by a shod foot. The Court accepted that serious injury would normally be present for greater harm, but held that the victim’s vulnerability and the repeated assaults justified that classification here.

5. The judge’s 18-month starting point before credit for plea reflected the aggravating features, balanced against the considerable 15-month delay. Although the 12-month term was stiff for a young offender without previous court appearances, the judge had considered the appellant’s personal mitigation and was entitled to conclude that immediate custody was required.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): dismissed the appeal against sentence: [2018] EWCA Crim 2481.
• Crown Court at Chester: on 14 August 2018, imposed 12 months’ youth detention for assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
• Magistrates’ court: on 8 June 2018, the appellant pleaded guilty and was committed to the Crown Court for sentence.