Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

R v Freddie Alexander Valencia

[2023] EWCA Crim 1683
A teenager stabbed someone badly and dealt drugs. A judge gave him a non-prison sentence, but a higher court decided that was too light and gave him four years in prison instead.

Key Facts

  • Freddie Valencia (born 20 October 2005) pleaded guilty to affray and other offences including causing grievous bodily harm with intent (GBH), possession of a bladed article, and drug trafficking.
  • Valencia stabbed a victim multiple times, causing serious injuries including a collapsed lung and spleen damage.
  • The incident occurred after a dispute over payment for cannabis.
  • Valencia was found to be a victim of modern slavery.
  • He received a youth rehabilitation order, which the Attorney General appealed as unduly lenient.

Legal Principles

A sentence is unduly lenient if it falls outside the range of sentences a judge could reasonably consider appropriate.

Attorney General's Reference No 4 of 1989 [1990] 1 WLR 41

When sentencing a child or young person, the court must consider the seriousness of the offence, the level of harm caused, and the risk of future harm. A custodial sentence is most likely unavoidable if necessary to protect the public from serious harm.

Children guideline, Sentencing Council, paragraph 6.44

When considering custody for a child, the court may consult the equivalent adult guideline, potentially applying a sentence of half to two-thirds of the adult sentence for those aged 15-17, with greater reduction for younger offenders. Emotional and developmental age should be considered.

Children guideline, Sentencing Council, paragraphs 6.45-6.46

Outcomes

The appeal was granted. The original youth rehabilitation order was quashed.

The court found the original sentence unduly lenient given the seriousness of the GBH offence, the use of a knife, Valencia's leadership role in the attack, and the additional drug offences. The judge failed to properly apply the relevant guidelines and considered mitigating factors of little weight.

Concurrent sentences of detention were imposed: four years for GBH, six months for cannabis supply, and twelve months for MDMA possession.

This sentence reflects the seriousness of the offences, particularly the GBH, while considering Valencia's age and guilty pleas. The court acknowledged the need for an individualized approach but determined that a custodial sentence was necessary.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.