R v Stefan Barrington Braithwaite
[2024] EWCA Crim 1193
R v Luke Begg
31 January 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 102
Court of Appeal
A man was sent to prison for a new crime while already on probation. The paperwork had mistakes, but the court said it didn't matter; the prison sentence was correct. The court also gave him a discount on his sentence for time already served under house arrest.
Key Facts
- •Luke Begg, aged 29, was convicted of assault by beating of an emergency worker.
- •This occurred while he was subject to a 24-month suspended sentence for assault occasioning actual bodily harm.
- •He was sentenced to 5 months' imprisonment for the new assault, plus 16 months (the reduced activated portion of the suspended sentence), totaling 21 months.
- •The Magistrates' Court committal paperwork contained errors regarding the legal basis for the committal to the Crown Court.
- •Begg had spent 302 days on qualifying curfew before sentencing, which was not considered by the sentencing judge.
Legal Principles
Committal to the Crown Court is not invalid if the Magistrates had a power available that would have lawfully achieved their intended outcome.
R v Ayhan [2011] EWCA Crim 3184
Section 14 and/or Section 20 of the Sentencing Act 2020 govern committal for sentence of a new offence.
Sentencing Act 2020
Paragraph 11(2) of Schedule 16 of the Sentencing Act 2020 deals with committal for breach of a suspended sentence.
Sentencing Act 2020
Section 325 of the Sentencing Act 2020 mandates credit for time spent on qualifying curfew as part of the sentence.
Sentencing Act 2020
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal clarified that the Magistrates' Court committal, despite errors in recording, was valid.
The Magistrates had the power to commit Begg for both the new offence and the breach of the suspended sentence, even if the paperwork incorrectly cited the legal basis.
Begg was granted 151 days' credit (half of the 302 days spent on curfew) against his sentence.
Section 325 of the Sentencing Act 2020 requires this credit to be applied.