R v Fartun Jamal
[2023] EWCA Crim 329
R v Lewis Richard John Romanis
14 December 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 1612
Court of Appeal
A young man was given a three-year prison sentence for hurting a baby. The appeal court reduced this to 21 months because the judge didn't fully consider the man's difficult past and mental health issues. The court thought the original sentence was too harsh, even though the man's actions were very serious.
Key Facts
- •Appellant (23 years old) pleaded guilty to two counts of causing or allowing serious injury to a child under section 5(1) of the Domestic Violence, Crime and Victims Act 2004.
- •Offences involved shaking a seven-month-old baby, causing brain injury, and causing severe bruising to the baby's bottom.
- •Appellant had limited mental and emotional functioning, scoring in the bottom 4% of the population intellectually.
- •Appellant had a history of physical, emotional, and sexual abuse.
- •Sentencing was delayed due to further investigations and family court proceedings.
- •New Sentencing Council guideline for the offence came into effect shortly before sentencing.
Legal Principles
Sentencing for causing or allowing serious physical harm to a child.
Sentencing Council guideline
Considerations of totality in sentencing for multiple offences.
Court of Appeal judgment
Mitigating factors in sentencing, including mental disorder, learning disability, and lack of maturity.
Sentencing Council guideline
Sentencing offenders with mental and developmental disorders.
Sentencing Council guideline
Considerations for and against suspending a sentence.
Sentencing Council guideline
Outcomes
Appeal allowed; original sentence of three years' imprisonment quashed.
Original sentence was manifestly excessive due to insufficient consideration of mitigating factors (appellant's limited mental and emotional functioning), failure to apply the Sentencing Council guideline on offenders with mental and developmental disorders, and an inappropriate approach to totality in sentencing.
Sentence substituted with concurrent terms of 21 months' imprisonment.
Court determined a two-year sentence before credit for guilty pleas was appropriate, reflecting mitigation and the application of relevant guidelines. A three-month reduction for guilty pleas resulted in the final sentence.
Sentence not suspended.
Court considered the seriousness of the offences and concluded that immediate custody was necessary.