R v Reece Mutsinze

A sentence of detention for a specified period under section 250 of the Sentencing Act 2020 is unlawful for a 17-year-old unless the statutory conditions for that form of detention are met. Unlawful wounding was not an offence for which that sentence could be imposed on this appellant.

Where the sentence is unlawful but its appropriate length is not challenged, the Court of Appeal may quash it and substitute the lawful youth sentence. A Detention and Training Order may be made consecutive to another sentence of detention under section 237(4).

R v Reece Mutsinze was an application for an extension of time and for leave to appeal against sentence. The appellant, aged 17 when sentenced, had pleaded guilty at Leeds Crown Court to unlawful wounding contrary to section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861.

The Crown Court imposed eight months’ detention under section 250 of the Sentencing Act 2020, consecutive to a 78-month detention sentence already being served. The appellant did not challenge the sentence’s length. The sole issue was whether the statutory form of sentence was lawful.

1. Appeal allowed. The court granted the 166-day extension of time and leave to appeal because the sole ground, although identified late, was that the sentence was unlawful.

2. The appellant was 17 when the Crown Court imposed eight months’ detention under section 250 of the Sentencing Act 2020. That provision authorises detention for a specified period for serious offences. For a 17-year-old, it could be used only for offences within section 249. Unlawful wounding was not such an offence. It was also not punishable by at least 14 years’ imprisonment for a person aged over 21.

3. The sentencing judge therefore had no power to impose the section 250 sentence. The court treated the error as dispositive. No realistic challenge was made to the eight-month length, notwithstanding the seriousness of the custodial assault and the appellant’s antecedents.

4. The lawful sentence was an eight-month Detention and Training Order. Section 237(4) permitted that order to run consecutively to the 78-month detention sentence that the appellant was serving when the assault occurred.

5. The court quashed the eight-month section 250 sentence and substituted an eight-month Detention and Training Order, consecutive to the existing 78-month sentence.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — by judgment dated 25 July 2024, [2024] EWCA Crim 989, granted an extension of time and leave, allowed the sentence appeal, quashed the unlawful sentence, and substituted an eight-month Detention and Training Order.
• Crown Court at Leeds — on 10 November 2023, imposed eight months’ detention under section 250 of the Sentencing Act 2020, consecutive to an existing 78-month detention sentence.