R v CDA

On a sentence appeal, the Court of Appeal may intervene where the total custodial term is manifestly excessive. The relevant grounds may include errors concerning starting points, totality and the weight given to personal mitigation. The court may quash the sentence on one count and substitute a lower sentence. Where identification creates a risk of harm that necessitates derogation from open justice, the court may also make an anonymity order and impose reporting restrictions under section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981.

The appellant pleaded guilty to serious offences and was sentenced to a total custodial term of several years by an unidentified sentencing court. With leave of the Single Judge, he appealed on grounds relating to the sentencing starting points, totality and the weight given to personal mitigation. The central issue was whether the total custodial term was manifestly excessive. The Court of Appeal allowed the appeal and substituted a lower sentence.

Appeal allowed.

1. The appellant had pleaded guilty to serious offences. At the sentencing hearing he made submissions on the appropriate starting points, personal mitigation and totality. He subsequently challenged the total custodial term as manifestly excessive.
2. Having considered those submissions, the Court of Appeal was persuaded that the total custodial term was manifestly excessive. The detailed reasons were set out in a closed judgment and are not reproduced in the supplied open judgment. The open judgment therefore does not identify the precise calculation or reasoning error affecting each count.
3. The court allowed the appeal, quashed the sentence on one count and substituted a lower sentence.
4. An anonymity order was maintained because the risk of harm from identifying the appellant necessitated derogation from open justice. Pursuant to section 11 of the Contempt of Court Act 1981, publication of information naming or otherwise identifying the appellant was prohibited. The court also declined to identify the sentencing court or judge.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): With leave of the Single Judge, allowed the appeal, quashed the sentence on one count and substituted a lower sentence: [2025] EWCA Crim 1406.
• Sentencing court: The appellant pleaded guilty to serious offences and received a total custodial term of several years. The court and judge were not identified.