R v Matthew Barker

Where the Crown Court deals with summary offences, its sentencing powers are constrained by those available to a Magistrates’ Court. Consecutive sentences must respect the statutory aggregate limit. A failure to surrender to bail must be sentenced in accordance with relevant Sentencing Council Guidelines unless contrary to the interests of justice. Deliberate evasion causing serious interference with the administration of justice may fall within category 1A. Previous convictions and earlier non-compliance may justify an upward adjustment from the guideline starting point. An appellate court may correct unlawful aggregate sentences and recalculate consequential driving disqualification orders.

On 28 April 2025, the Crown Court at Leicester sentenced the appellant to a total of 52 months’ imprisonment for aggravated vehicle taking, taking vehicles without consent, driving whilst disqualified and failing to surrender to bail. The appellant appealed against the 10-month sentence for failing to surrender. The Registrar referred four consecutive five-month sentences for summary offences, and leave to appeal was granted in respect of those sentences. The appeal raised the statutory limit on consecutive sentences for summary offences, the proper application of the bail-offence sentencing guidelines, and the consequential driving disqualification orders.

1. Summary offences. Under section 40(2) of the 1988 Act, the Crown Court could deal with each summary offence only in the manner available to a Magistrates’ Court. Section 131 of the Magistrates’ Court Act permitted consecutive sentences, but limited their aggregate term to six months. The four consecutive five-month sentences, totalling 20 months, were therefore unlawful.
2. The court corrected the error by quashing and substituting sentences. The 22-month sentence for aggravated vehicle taking remained unchanged. Three-month sentences were substituted for the relevant summary offences, with the sentences on counts 5 and 6 running concurrently. The total sentence for the driving offences became 28 months.
3. Failure to surrender to bail. Section 59 of the Sentencing Act 2020 required the court to follow relevant sentencing guidelines unless satisfied that doing so would be contrary to the interests of justice. The offence was category 1A: culpability was category A because the appellant deliberately sought to evade or delay justice, and harm was category 1 because the conduct seriously interfered with the administration of justice. The guideline starting point was six weeks’ custody, with a range of 28 days to 26 weeks.
4. The adjourned sentencing hearing, the public and police resources required, the appellant’s extensive criminal record, and his previous failures to comply with court orders were aggravating features. A sentence of about four months was appropriate. The 10-month sentence was quashed and four months’ imprisonment was substituted, to run consecutively as a matter of principle.
5. Driving disqualification. The 38-month order was set aside. The court substituted 12 months’ discretionary disqualification under section 34 of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, followed by extended disqualification under sections 35A and 35B, producing a total of 28 months. The additional extended-test requirement was quashed because the appellant was already subject to such an order. The total custody period was 32 months and the victim surcharge was corrected to £190.

1. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — In [2025] EWCA Crim 1293, the appeal was allowed to the extent that unlawful summary-offence sentences and the excessive bail sentence were quashed and substituted. The driving disqualification and extended-test order were also varied.
2. Crown Court at Leicester — On 28 April 2025, HHJ Timothy Spencer imposed a total sentence of 52 months’ imprisonment, including consecutive five-month sentences for the summary offences and 10 months for failing to surrender to bail.