R v Rhys Johnson-Warner

A renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence requires a good reason for substantial delay and proposed grounds with a real prospect of success. The Court may examine the underlying merits to avoid injustice. An immaterial error in the single judge’s reasoning does not justify renewal where it did not affect the sentence imposed. A sentence challenge may also be academic once the sentence and related disqualification have expired.

The applicant pleaded guilty to dangerous driving, failing to provide a breath specimen and driving whilst unfit through drink. On 10 February 2022, the Crown Court at Croydon imposed concurrent suspended sentences, disqualifications and ancillary requirements. A single judge refused leave to appeal on 4 July 2022. The applicant renewed the application more than a year late, contending that the sentencing categorisation, treatment of alcohol, totality and guilty plea credit were erroneous. The central issues were whether time should be extended and whether the proposed appeal had a realistic prospect of success.

1. The Court refused the extension of time and the renewed application for leave. The delay exceeded one year, and the Court was not persuaded that there was a good reason for it. The Court nevertheless considered the merits to avoid any risk of injustice.

2. The proposed grounds were not reasonably arguable and had no real prospect of success. The sentencing judge was entitled to place the dangerous driving in the category adopted, taking account of the combination of dangerous driving features and alcohol-related aggravation. The submissions concerning double counting, totality and the credit for the guilty plea did not disclose an arguable sentencing error.

3. The single judge had proceeded on the mistaken impression that the applicant had been disqualified from driving at the relevant time. That error originated in the formulation of the original application. It had no material effect on the appropriateness of the sentence and had not featured in the sentencing judge’s reasoning. It therefore provided no basis for renewing leave.

4. The application was also academic in practical terms because the sentence had been served and the disqualification period had expired. The renewed application for leave was accordingly refused.

1. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): On 22 November 2024, in [2024] EWCA Crim 1540, refused the extension of time and the renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence.
2. Single judge of the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Refused leave to appeal on 4 July 2022.
3. Crown Court at Croydon: On 10 February 2022, sentenced the applicant following his guilty pleas.