Tyndale, R. v

Where a sentencing court has omitted the required qualifying-curfew credit pronouncement under section 240A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003, the Court of Appeal may grant an extension of time and make the correct pronouncement. A lengthy delay does not preclude relief where the applicant, after learning of the error, has not failed to act with due diligence. The court applied R v Thorsby [2015] EWCA Crim 1 in determining that question.

Following a trial at Leicester Crown Court, Stephen Tyndale was convicted of conspiracy to defraud and conspiracy to conceal, disguise, convert or transfer criminal property. He was sentenced to a total of ten years’ imprisonment and admitted an offence under the Bail Act 1976.

He renewed, 683 days out of time, his application for leave to appeal against sentence. The sole issue was the sentencing judge’s omission to pronounce the qualifying-curfew credit required by section 240A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.

1. The court granted the necessary extension of time and made a pronouncement under section 240A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 that the appropriate credit period was 93 days.

2. It was common ground that the applicant had spent 185 days on qualifying curfew. That period produced a credit of 93 days. The sentencing judge had accepted that a pronouncement to this effect should be made during mitigation submissions, but no pronouncement was in fact made.

3. The court considered R v Thorsby [2015] EWCA Crim 1 when deciding whether the substantial delay should prevent an extension. It held that, even though the renewed application was lodged 683 days late, it could not be said that the applicant had failed to act with due diligence after acquiring knowledge of the error.

4. The omission was therefore corrected by the Court of Appeal’s own pronouncement. No wider challenge to the ten-year sentence was determined.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): granted an extension of time and corrected the omitted qualifying-curfew credit pronouncement.

• Leicester Crown Court: on 20 December 2016, convicted the applicant and imposed a total sentence of ten years’ imprisonment. The required pronouncement under section 240A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 was omitted.