R v Hamoda Alizarif Ebrahim
[2024] EWCA Crim 273
R v Alan Ludar-Smith
14 February 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 199
Court of Appeal
A man was given 3 years in prison for sexually assaulting a young girl three times. The judge said it was too harsh and reduced the sentence to 2 years and 3 months because of his guilty plea and other factors.
Key Facts
- •Alan Ludar-Smith (appellant) pleaded guilty to three counts of sexual assault of a child under 13.
- •The offences occurred between 2014 and 2016 against a complainant aged 9-11.
- •The appellant was a trusted family friend who assaulted the complainant on three separate occasions in her home.
- •The appellant had three prior convictions for sexual offences against children.
- •The appellant was sentenced to three years' imprisonment (one year consecutive for each count).
- •The appellant appealed against sentence on the grounds of excessiveness.
Legal Principles
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992: Anonymity of victims in publications.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992
Sentencing Guidelines: Categorisation of harm and culpability, aggravating and mitigating factors, totality principle, and credit for guilty pleas.
Sexual Offences Sentencing Guidelines
Appeal against sentence: Test for manifest excessiveness.
Court of Appeal Criminal Division precedent
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
The Court of Appeal found the original sentence of three years' imprisonment to be manifestly excessive given the circumstances, including the aggravating and mitigating factors. While consecutive sentences were appropriate given the nature of the offending, the total sentence was reduced.
Original sentence quashed.
The three-year sentence was deemed disproportionate to the overall offending considering totality and the credit for guilty pleas.
New sentence imposed: 2 years and 3 months imprisonment (9 months consecutive for each count).
The Court adjusted the sentence to reflect a just and proportionate punishment considering the aggravating factors, the victim's harm, and appropriate credit for the appellant's guilty pleas.