Clough, R. v

On an appeal against sentence, the court will not intervene merely because the aggregate term is severe. It must assess the individual sentences and the overall sentence in the round, applying the principle of totality. Consecutive sentences for separate serious offences may be proper where each offence warrants a substantial sentence and the offender’s record and other aggravating circumstances justify it. The appeal will be dismissed where the total sentence is neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle.

The appellant pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Leeds to two offences of inflicting grievous bodily harm contrary to section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861, domestic burglary, and escape from lawful custody.

He received consecutive terms of two years’ imprisonment for each grievous bodily harm offence and three years for burglary. The nine-month sentence for escape was concurrent. The aggregate sentence was seven years’ imprisonment.

With leave of the single judge, he appealed on the basis that the sentences for the assaults were too high and that consecutive terms, particularly the burglary term, offended the principle of totality.

1. Appeal dismissed. The seven-year aggregate sentence was neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle.

2. The first grievous bodily harm offence was a serious assault. A sentence of 30 months before credit for the guilty plea was fully justified by its seriousness, the appellant’s previous convictions, and the fact that he committed it while on licence. The resulting two-year sentence was not excessive.

3. The three-year sentence for burglary, after credit for plea, was also justified. The appellant was a recidivist burglar with a substantial relevant record.

4. The second grievous bodily harm offence warranted a consecutive two-year term. It was a serious assault on a person seeking to prevent the appellant’s criminal activity, and the appellant’s antecedents were very considerable aggravating circumstances.

5. Applying totality by standing back and considering the case in the round, the court held that the consecutive sentences did not produce an excessive aggregate. Although severe, the total term properly reflected the distinct and serious offending.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Dismissed the appeal against the seven-year sentence in [2019] EWCA Crim 1119.
• Crown Court at Leeds: On 23 January 2019, imposed consecutive sentences totalling seven years’ imprisonment following guilty pleas to two section 20 offences, burglary and escape from lawful custody.