Case details
Summary
A sentencing judge may select as the lead offence the offence carrying the longest maximum sentence and reflecting the most serious violence. Multiple culpability factors and harm at the upper end of a guideline category may justify moving from the starting point to the top of the range. The totality principle does not require concurrent treatment where separate offences represent distinct criminality; individual guideline starting points may inform a cumulative uplift. Self-induced drug-related psychosis may aggravate rather than mitigate offending where voluntary drug use caused it. A lengthy extended licence period may remain justified by the seriousness of the offending and the need for public protection, despite progress in custody.
Factual background
By leave of the Single Judge, the appellant appealed against sentence imposed by the Crown Court at Norwich on 10 March 2025. He had pleaded guilty at different stages to offences including wounding with intent, unlawful wounding, controlling or coercive behaviour, threatening to kill and criminal damage arising from prolonged domestic abuse.
The Recorder imposed an extended determinate sentence of 17 years and 9 months, comprising 12 years and 9 months’ custody and a five-year extended licence period. The appeal challenged the categorisation of psychological harm, the uplift for the totality of the offending, the treatment of drug-induced psychosis and mitigation, and the length of the extension period. The central issue was whether the sentence was wrong in principle or manifestly excessive.
Held
The appeal was dismissed. The custodial term was neither wrong in principle nor manifestly excessive, and the five-year extended licence period was upheld.
- Lead offence. It was proper to take the section 18 wounding with intent as the lead offence because it carried the longest maximum sentence, life imprisonment, and reflected the most serious physical violence inflicted. [39]
- Culpability and harm. The hammer attack involved high culpability, including the victim’s vulnerability, use of a highly dangerous weapon, and a prolonged and persistent assault. Under the applicable guideline, category 1 harm required a permanent irreversible psychological condition with a substantial and long-term effect on ordinary activities or work. Category 2 required a permanent irreversible condition outside category 1. The victim had suffered really serious psychological harm with a substantial long-term effect, which was likely to endure. The harm therefore fell within category 2 and was at its upper end. [40]–[41]
- Guideline adjustment and totality. Multiple culpability factors and harm at the upper end of category 2 justified increasing the seven-year starting point to 10 years. Domestic abuse, the presence of a child, abuse of trust, drug use and previous convictions justified a significant further increase. The individual guideline starting points for the other offences demonstrated that the additional criminality was substantial. The stabbing and threat to kill were separate incidents for which consecutive sentences could in principle have been imposed. The increase to 17 years therefore respected totality and was not excessive. [42]–[51]
- Mitigation and psychosis. The judge was entitled to treat psychosis resulting from excessive voluntary cocaine use as aggravating rather than mitigating. The two-year reduction for age, immaturity, remorse, ADHD and progress in addressing offending was ample. [51]–[52]
- Extended sentence. The nature and seriousness of the offending, together with the appellant’s abuse of cocaine and continuing risk, justified a lengthy licence period for public protection. Progress in prison did not make the five-year extension wrong in principle or manifestly excessive. [54]
The court’s approach to earlier authorities
This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.
Appellate history
- Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): [2025] EWCA Crim 1784. Appeal against sentence dismissed.
- Crown Court at Norwich: On 10 March 2025, Mr Recorder Turner imposed an extended determinate sentence of 17 years and 9 months, comprising 12 years and 9 months’ custody and a five-year extended licence period.
Lower court decision
Key cases cited
This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.
Cases citing this case
This feature is available to zoomLaw Pro members.