Ali, R. v

For sentencing under the Sentencing Council Guideline for Intimidatory Offences, category 1 harm may be established by a justified fear of violence on many occasions. It does not depend solely on proof of significant psychological harm. Relevant previous convictions and offending committed while subject to a community order may aggravate sentence. An alleged error in credit for a guilty plea does not affect the overall sentence where the relevant concurrent sentence does not increase the total term. The totality of the offending, including associated offences, may justify an immediate custodial sentence.

The applicant pleaded guilty at Leeds Crown Court to controlling or coercive behaviour in an intimate or family relationship, two assaults by beating, two offences of criminal damage, taking a conveyance without authority, and summary motoring offences.

On 12 December 2019 he received a total sentence of 38 months’ imprisonment and an indefinite restraining order. He renewed his application for leave to appeal against sentence after refusal by the Single Judge.

He contended that the controlling or coercive behaviour should have been assessed as category 2A rather than category 1A under the Sentencing Council Guideline for Intimidatory Offences. He also challenged the prospect of suspension and the credit for one guilty plea.

1. The renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence was dismissed. The total sentence of 38 months’ imprisonment was neither manifestly excessive nor disproportionate to the totality of the offending.

2. The sentencing judge was entitled to assess the controlling or coercive behaviour as category 1A under the Sentencing Council Guideline for Intimidatory Offences. The applicant’s persistent conduct over a prolonged period established higher culpability. Category 1 harm was justified not only by the complainant’s psychological impact, isolation and disrupted work life, but also by her justified fear of violence on many occasions. Fear of violence was a separate category 1 feature.

3. The judge properly treated the applicant’s relevant previous convictions for assault and other violence as aggravating. It was also aggravating that some offending occurred while he was subject to a community order. The judge had taken account of the available mitigation, including the applicant’s background and the pre-sentence report.

4. The applicant had expressly received one-third credit for the earlier guilty plea to criminal damage. In any event, the sentence for that count was concurrent, so any suggested error could not affect the overall term. Suspension was not an available option in these circumstances.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed: [2020] EWCA Crim 572 .

• Leeds Crown Court: On 12 December 2019, the applicant was sentenced to 38 months’ imprisonment and made subject to an indefinite restraining order following guilty pleas.