Key Facts
- •Appellant (aged 48) sentenced to 32 months' imprisonment for five offences of failing to comply with sex offender notification requirements (Sexual Offences Act 2003, section 91(1)(a) and (2)).
- •Offences involved non-disclosure of bank account, credit card, and two social media accounts over a 22-month period, and failure to register a weekend address.
- •Previous convictions for similar offences in 2013 and 2018, and a breach in 2017 dealt with by caution.
- •Appellant pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity.
- •Sentencing judge assessed culpability as level A (highest) and harm as level 1 (highest) based on police assessment of high risk.
- •Appeal based on incorrect harm categorization and excessive sentence.
Legal Principles
Sentencing Council Guidelines for failure to comply with notification requirements.
Sentencing Council Guidelines
Totality principle in sentencing.
Sentencing Guidelines
Sexual Offences Act 2003, section 91(1)(a) and (2): Failure to comply with notification requirements.
Sexual Offences Act 2003
Outcomes
Appeal allowed.
Court found insufficient evidence to support the sentencing judge's conclusion that the breaches risked very serious harm or distress. Harm was recategorized as level 2, not level 1.
Sentence for the first offence quashed and replaced with 2 years and 4 months' imprisonment.
Original sentence of 4 years (pre-discount) deemed manifestly excessive for Category 2A offence. Adjusted sentence reflects aggravating factors but considers the harm level correctly.
Sentences for offences 2 to 5 remain unaffected.
The appeal focused only on the sentence for the first offence and the categorization of harm.