R v Anthony Douglas
[2023] EWCA Crim 1709
R v Steven Arthur Connolly
16 January 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 31
Court of Appeal
A man was given a long prison sentence for threatening his ex-partner with an axe. The appeal court thought the sentence was too harsh, reducing it to a shorter sentence which will not be suspended, even though it could have been.
Key Facts
- •Appellant (37) pleaded guilty to possession of a bladed article and affray.
- •Incident involved appellant attending ex-partner's home with an axe, shouting, and causing damage.
- •Appellant had prior convictions for affray and threatening to damage property.
- •Judge sentenced appellant to 28 months imprisonment (concurrent sentences for each count).
- •Appeal based on excessive notional sentence and insufficient consideration of remoteness of prior offences.
Legal Principles
Totality principle in sentencing.
Sentencing Guidelines
Category ranges for bladed article and affray offences.
Sentencing Guidelines
Considerations for departing from sentencing guidelines.
Case law (implied)
Appropriate discount for guilty plea.
Sentencing Guidelines
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
Original sentence was manifestly excessive. The Court of Appeal found that the judge's increase to the notional sentence before discount for plea was not justified given the circumstances. The Court adjusted the sentence to reflect the aggravating factors while remaining within the appropriate category range and applying the totality principle.
Sentences of 28 months and 24 months quashed.
The court substituted a sentence of 20 months on each count, to run concurrently. This was deemed a just and appropriate sentence in all the circumstances.
Suspension of sentence deemed inappropriate.
Seriousness of offending and recent similar conviction outweighed any mitigating factors.