R v Alan Ludar-Smith
[2024] EWCA Crim 199
R v Hamoda Alizarif Ebrahim
7 March 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 273
Court of Appeal
A man was given a long prison sentence for sexually assaulting three women on public transport. The appeal court thought the sentence was too harsh, even though he did bad things, and reduced it to a shorter sentence.
Key Facts
- •Hamoda Alizarif Ebrahim (appellant) was sentenced to 68 weeks' imprisonment for three counts of sexual assault.
- •Offences involved sexual assaults on three separate victims on public transport.
- •Appellant was on licence for a previous conviction and on bail for the first offence during the commission of the subsequent offences.
- •Appellant targeted lone females, showing an element of planning in some instances.
- •The judge categorized each offence as a category 3B offence, applying aggravating factors and making an upward adjustment to the starting point.
- •The appellant pleaded guilty.
Legal Principles
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992 provisions regarding victim anonymity in publications.
Sexual Offences (Amendment) Act 1992
Sentencing Council guidelines on sexual assault (category 3B offences).
Sentencing Council guidelines
Principle of totality in sentencing.
Sentencing guidelines
Outcomes
Appeal allowed; original sentence quashed.
The Court of Appeal found the original sentence of 68 weeks to be manifestly excessive, particularly considering the sentencing guidelines and the principle of totality.
New sentences imposed: 11 weeks (count 1), 12 weeks (count 2), 12 weeks (count 3), consecutive.
The Court considered a total sentence of approximately 46 weeks (before guilty plea reduction) to be appropriate, resulting in the new consecutive sentences totalling 35 weeks.