R v Hazrat Kharutti
[2024] EWCA Crim 377
R v Colin Hoffman
7 February 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 146
Court of Appeal
A man was convicted of planning to have sex with children he met online. He was sentenced to prison and tried to appeal saying the sentence was too harsh. The appeal court disagreed, saying the judge was fair and the sentence was appropriate given the seriousness of his crimes.
Key Facts
- •Colin Hoffman convicted of two offences of arranging the commission of a child sex offence (contrary to section 14(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003).
- •He communicated online with an undercover police officer, believing her to be the mother of two young daughters.
- •He arranged to have sex with the 10-year-old and 2-year-old daughters.
- •Sentenced to three years and nine months' imprisonment on each offence, to run concurrently.
- •A Sexual Harm Prevention Order for 20 years and a Deprivation Order were also made.
- •Hoffman appealed against the sentence, arguing it was manifestly excessive.
Legal Principles
Sentencing for offences under section 14(1) of the Sexual Offences Act 2003 is guided by the Sentencing Council guidelines.
Sentencing Council guidelines
The totality principle should be considered when sentencing for multiple offences.
Case law
Appeals against sentence must demonstrate that the sentence was manifestly excessive.
Case law
Outcomes
Hoffman's application for an extension of time to appeal and for legal representation was refused.
The court found that it was not reasonably arguable that the sentence was manifestly excessive. The judge considered all mitigation and the facts of the offence, applying the totality principle to reach the shortest sentence commensurate with the seriousness of the offending.