R v Susan Goose
[2024] EWCA Crim 1335
R v Michael O’Brien
26 September 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 1413
Court of Appeal
A man was convicted of scamming two elderly people out of a lot of money. He got a long prison sentence. He tried to appeal, saying the sentence was too long, but the judge said it was fair given the severity of his crimes.
Key Facts
- •Michael O'Brien pleaded guilty to five counts of fraud and money laundering.
- •Offences involved defrauding two vulnerable victims, Mr. Kuehn and Miss Williams-Reid, over a period of years.
- •O'Brien and an accomplice defrauded Mr. Kuehn of £85,800 for substandard home repairs.
- •O'Brien and an accomplice defrauded Miss Williams-Reid of £10,300 for roof repairs, leaving her property damaged.
- •O'Brien received £9,500 in cash and his wife received £41,000 in bank transfers from Mr. Kuehn.
- •O'Brien was sentenced to six years and seven months' imprisonment.
- •The appeal focused on whether the judge correctly applied totality principles in sentencing.
Legal Principles
Totality principle in sentencing: the overall sentence should reflect all offending behavior, harm, culpability, aggravating and mitigating factors, and be just and proportionate.
Sentencing Council's guideline on Totality
When consecutive sentences are imposed, a downward adjustment is usually required to ensure a just and proportionate overall sentence.
Sentencing Council's guideline on Totality
A substantial interval between groups of offences may justify a conclusion that little or no reduction is needed for totality.
Sentencing Council's guideline on Totality
Sentencing guidelines for fraud offences.
Sentencing Council's definitive guideline for Fraud offences
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The Court of Appeal found the trial judge's sentencing decision, although possibly on the side of leniency, was not wrong in principle or manifestly excessive. The judge’s decision to not reduce the sentence for totality, given the significant time lapse between the two sets of offences, was deemed acceptable.