R v Bradley Cain

For causing death by dangerous driving, multiple Category A culpability indicators and serious aggravating conduct may justify a substantial increase above the guideline starting point. Driving while heavily impaired by alcohol and drugs, at excessive speed, after a deliberate decision to drive, may make the offence a very high Category A case.

Mitigation must be considered, but it may carry limited weight where the offender was a mature adult, had a sustained history of drug use, and continued dangerous driving despite clear awareness of intoxication. A sentence within the guideline range will not be manifestly excessive merely because the offender relies on positive character, belated remorse and rehabilitation.

The applicant pleaded guilty at Maidstone Crown Court to causing death by dangerous driving and to failing to stop and report an accident. While heavily intoxicated by alcohol, cocaine and cannabis, he drove at speed and erratically, struck and killed Lisa Chapman, and left the scene.

Her Honour Judge Julian Smith sentenced him to ten years and ten months’ imprisonment after adopting a notional term of 14 years and six months’ custody for a Category A offence and allowing 25 per cent credit for the guilty plea. The applicant sought an extension of time and leave to appeal against sentence. He contended that the judge had given insufficient weight to mitigation.

1. The court declined to extend time and refused leave to appeal against sentence. The sentence of ten years and ten months’ imprisonment was not manifestly excessive.

2. The offence was a very high Category A case under the applicable Sentencing Council guideline. The applicant deliberately drove despite knowing that he was unfit to do so. His driving was prolonged, fast and erratic, he was highly impaired by alcohol and drugs, and he drove without lights. These were four direct Category A indicators. His failure to stop, abandonment of the vehicle and persistent denials of responsibility were further aggravating features.

3. The guideline starting point for a Category A offence was 12 years’ custody, within a range of eight to 18 years. The number and seriousness of the culpability indicators and aggravating factors could have justified a pre-mitigation term at or close to the top of that range. The judge’s pre-plea term of 14 years and six months therefore already reflected meaningful allowance for mitigation.

4. The court accepted that positive character and belated remorse were mitigating factors, but they carried limited weight given the gravity of the offending. The applicant’s age, 25 at the time, was hardly mitigating. His previous cannabis conviction was relevant because it demonstrated long-standing drug use. The driving was not impulsive: he chose to retrieve the car, continued after damaging it when leaving the driveway, and then drove dangerously for some distance.

5. The 25 per cent guilty-plea reduction was not challenged. The final sentence was in accordance with the guideline and required no appellate intervention.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Declined to extend time and refused leave to appeal against the sentence.
• Crown Court at Maidstone: On 23 November 2023, Her Honour Judge Julian Smith sentenced the applicant to ten years and ten months’ imprisonment after guilty pleas to causing death by dangerous driving, failing to stop and failing to report an accident.