R v Aman Habibi

On an appeal against sentence, a severe sentence should stand if, having regard to the totality of the offending and all relevant aggravating features, it is not manifestly excessive. An assault on an emergency worker warrants a significant uplift over the sentence for common assault, and the resulting sentence may considerably exceed the basic offence category range. Failure to state the unaggravated sentence in open court, although contrary to the sentencing guideline, does not by itself invalidate the sentence. Concurrent imprisonment for related racially aggravated harassment may be appropriate where the overall criminality and aggravating features justify custody.

The appellant appealed with leave against sentences imposed by Isleworth Crown Court on 30 June 2025. He had pleaded guilty to two assaults on emergency workers and racially aggravated intentional harassment, alarm and distress contrary to section 31(1)(b) of the Crime and Disorder Act 1988, arising from an incident involving police officers on 18 July 2022.

The Crown Court imposed concurrent sentences of 15 months, 12 months and 12 months respectively. The appeal concerned only those sentences, and the central issue was whether the overall sentence was manifestly excessive, having regard to the sentencing guidelines, totality and the aggravating features.

Appeal dismissed. The appeal was limited to the sentences for the offences committed on 18 July 2022. The sentence of 15 months for the series of three offences, and the concurrent sentence of 12 months for racially aggravated harassment, were not manifestly excessive.

1. The court upheld the sentencing judge’s categorisation of both assaults as culpability category A2 and harm category 2. The assault-on-an-emergency-worker guideline required an appropriate uplift from the sentence for simple assault. For category A2, a significantly more onerous penalty, or a more severe type of sentence, was appropriate, and the uplifted sentence could considerably exceed the basic offence category range.
2. The sentence had to reflect the totality of the three offences committed on 18 July 2022, rather than the criminality of one assault considered in isolation. The relevant aggravating features included the assaults on police officers, the racial aggravation against a police officer in the course of his duties, offending during the operational period of a suspended sentence, drunkenness, relevant previous convictions, lack of remorse and insight, and the assessed risk of serious harm to family members.
3. For the racially aggravated harassment offence, the sentencing remarks showed that the defence categorisation had been accepted. The correct starting point was band B5, not band C5, with a range from discharge to a low-level community order. Nevertheless, because imprisonment was imposed for the assaults and the racial aggravation was significant, a concurrent custodial sentence was appropriate.
4. The guideline required the sentencer to state in open court what the sentence would have been without the emergency-worker aggravation. The failure to do so did not invalidate the sentence.

Although the sentence was severe, the combination of the guideline uplift, totality and the additional aggravating features meant that it was not manifestly excessive.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): The appeal against sentence was dismissed: [2025] EWCA Crim 1523.
• Isleworth Crown Court: On 30 June 2025, Mr Recorder Laidlaw imposed concurrent custodial sentences for the two assaults on emergency workers and the racially aggravated harassment offence. The appellant also received a consecutive three-month sentence for harassment without violence.