R v Richard Alexander Welsh

In sentencing for stalking involving serious alarm or distress, a guideline starting point and range do not prevent a sentence above the top of the range where the combination of culpability and harm features justifies further adjustment, followed by consideration of aggravating factors, mitigation and credit for a guilty plea. A consecutive sentence for contempt of court may be appropriate, but the totality principle requires its length to reflect the nature and impact of the contempt. A brief courtroom outburst that does not interfere with the sentencing exercise, followed by immediate admission and apology, may make a substantial consecutive term manifestly excessive.

After pleading guilty to stalking and contempt of court, R v Richard Alexander Welsh was sentenced by the Crown Court at Preston to 4 years and 6 months for stalking and a consecutive 4 months for contempt. He appealed by leave of the Single Judge, arguing that the stalking sentence was excessive and that the contempt sentence should have been concurrent. The central issues were whether the stalking sentence could properly exceed the guideline range and whether the separate contempt sentence was proportionate.

Appeal allowed in part.

1. The stalking sentence was not manifestly excessive. Although the previous firearms conviction was not recent and differed in nature from the present offending, the culpability B and harm 1 features justified an upward adjustment from the guideline starting point. The combination of those features and the multiple aggravating factors entitled the judge to sentence above the top of the guideline range before allowing for mitigation and credit for the late guilty plea.
2. The judge was entitled to impose a consecutive sentence for the contempt of court. The outburst was offensive and attacked the administration of justice. However, the principle of totality required the term to reflect that it was very brief, did not interfere with the sentencing exercise, and was immediately admitted and apologised for.
3. The 4-month term for contempt was therefore manifestly excessive. It was reduced to 1 month, consecutive to the stalking sentence, producing a total sentence of 4 years and 7 months’ imprisonment.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): allowed the appeal to the extent identified and reduced the consecutive contempt sentence to 1 month, giving a total sentence of 4 years and 7 months’ imprisonment.
• Crown Court at Preston: following guilty pleas, imposed 4 years and 6 months’ imprisonment for stalking and a consecutive 4 months for contempt of court.