R v Sean Gerald Doyle

On an appeal against sentence, the court asks whether the sentence is wrong in principle or manifestly excessive. The sentence must be assessed in aggregate, rather than by isolating one component such as driving disqualification. Exceptionally dangerous driving creating a very high risk to the public may justify a lengthy disqualification for public protection and deterrence. Voluntary alcohol or drug use may aggravate the offending, although mental-health difficulties and other mitigation must be considered.

The appellant pleaded guilty to dangerous driving contrary to the Road Traffic Act 1988. The Crown Court at Northampton imposed a 12-month Community Order, together with a 30-month driving disqualification and an extended retest order. The appeal, brought with leave, challenged only the length of the disqualification. The appellant relied on his mental-health difficulties, efforts to obtain treatment, and the impact on his work and family life. The central issue was whether the sentence, considered as a whole, was wrong in principle or manifestly excessive.

Appeal dismissed. The sentence and the 30-month disqualification remained undisturbed.

1. The correct approach on an appeal against sentence was to ask whether the sentence was wrong in principle or manifestly excessive. The sentence had to be considered in aggregate. The disqualification could not properly be viewed in isolation from the Community Order and its requirements.
2. Under s.34(1) of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, conviction for dangerous driving required disqualification for at least 12 months unless special reasons applied. The statutory minimum provided the relevant baseline, but the issue was whether the longer period imposed was excessive.
3. The driving was exceptionally dangerous. The appellant had failed to stop for police, reached 110 mph on a 70 mph road, travelled at 70 mph in a 40 mph zone, evaded a police boxing-in manoeuvre and created a very high risk of death to other road users and pedestrians. His voluntary use of alcohol and cannabis was also relevant aggravation.
4. The court carefully considered the appellant’s mental-health difficulties, attempts to obtain help, good character and personal circumstances. Nevertheless, the seriousness of the offending justified a lengthy disqualification both to protect the public and to deter similar conduct. The overall sentence was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): In [2022] EWCA Crim 1869, the appeal against the length of the driving disqualification was dismissed.
• Crown Court at Northampton: On 4 March 2022, the appellant was sentenced to a 12-month Community Order, disqualified from driving for 30 months and ordered to take an extended retest.
• Northampton Magistrates’ Court: On 31 January 2022, the appellant pleaded guilty and was committed to the Crown Court for sentence.