R v Tyrone Jugessur

Sentencing remarks may be concise, but section 52 of the Sentencing Code requires the court to state the reasons for sentence, explain how relevant guidelines were applied, and identify the guilty-plea discount. For each offence, the court should address the key facts, guideline category and starting point, adjustments, plea credit and totality. An appellate court redoing an inadequately reasoned exercise must respect section 11(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968: taking the case as a whole, the appellant must not be more severely dealt with. Under the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988, a disqualification accompanying custody must identify the discretionary period, statutory extension and any justified uplift for consecutive sentences.

The appellant appealed from the Crown Court at Cardiff against a total sentence of 40 months’ imprisonment for nine offences, including dangerous driving, theft, handling stolen goods, driving while disqualified, driving without insurance and criminal damage. He challenged the guilty-plea credit, the consecutive sentences and totality. The Court of Appeal also identified inadequate sentencing reasons and uncertainty about the statutory calculation of driving disqualification. The central issues were whether the remarks complied with section 52 of the Sentencing Code, how the sentence should be redone subject to section 11(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1968, and how sections 34, 35A and 35B of the Road Traffic Offenders Act 1988 applied.

Disposition. The appeal was allowed in part. The Court of Appeal redid the sentencing exercise, increased some individual terms, reduced others, and reduced the total custodial sentence from 40 to 38 months.

1. Sentencing remarks. Brief remarks are permissible, but section 52 of the Sentencing Code requires reasons, an explanation of compliance with sentencing guidelines and a statement of any guilty-plea discount. The court endorsed the guidance in R v Chin-Charles [2019] EWCA Crim 1140, [2019] 1 WLR 5921, while emphasising that brevity does not excuse omission of the required matters. For each offence, the sentencing court should briefly address the key facts, guideline category, starting point, adjustments, guilty-plea discount and totality, consistently with R v Beckford [2019] 1 Cr App R (S) 53.
2. Resentencing. The court applied one-third credit to the first theft, 25 per cent to the handling offence and 10 per cent to the remaining offences. Dangerous driving produced an 18-month term after a 20-month assessment and 10 per cent credit. The first and second thefts attracted consecutive terms of 10 months each. The handling sentence was reduced to three months concurrent because the original consecutive term was manifestly excessive. Criminal damage did not warrant custody, so its consecutive custodial sentence was quashed and replaced with no separate penalty. The totality principle required a further six-month reduction to the second theft sentence.
3. Driving disqualification. Applying the guidance in R v Needham [2016] 1 WLR 4449, the court identified the discretionary period, the obligatory extension equal to half the dangerous-driving custody, and any uplift required because consecutive custody diminishes the effect of disqualification. A total of four years seven months would otherwise have resulted, comprising three years’ discretionary disqualification, nine months’ extension and a ten-month uplift. Section 11(3) required the court to retain the three-year total, structured as two years three months’ discretionary disqualification and nine months’ extension, with no uplift.
4. Final orders. The sentences for dangerous driving, both thefts, handling and criminal damage were quashed and substituted as stated. All other sentences stood.

1. Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): In [2026] EWCA Crim 1010 , the court redid the sentencing exercise, varied the individual sentences, retained a three-year driving disqualification and reduced the total custodial term to 38 months.
2. Crown Court at Cardiff: On 1 April 2026, Mr Recorder Gregory Bull KC imposed a total custodial sentence of 40 months and a three-year driving disqualification.