Caselaw Digest
Caselaw Digest

R v Steven Carl Evans

[2024] EWCA Crim 237
A man was convicted of many serious sex crimes. The judge gave him a 32-year sentence, but the Court of Appeal thought that wasn't long enough and increased it to 38 years. They said the original sentence didn't reflect how bad the crimes were.

Key Facts

  • The respondent was convicted of 37 offences, mostly serious sex offences against three women (C, L, E) and one man (T) between 2015 and 2021.
  • Offences included multiple rapes, assaults by penetration, sexual assaults, and administering stupefying substances.
  • The respondent was sentenced to an extended sentence of 32 years (24 years custody, 8 years extended licence).
  • The Attorney General referred the sentence as unduly lenient under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

Legal Principles

Principles for undue leniency applications under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.

Attorney-General’s Reference (R v Azad) [2021] EWCA Crim 1846

Section 36 applications should only be granted in exceptional circumstances and not in borderline cases.

Attorney-General’s Reference (R v Azad) [2021] EWCA Crim 1846

The Court of Appeal's role is not to re-sentence but to consider if the original sentence fell outside the reasonable range.

Attorney General’s Reference (No 4 of 1989)

Sentencing guidelines for rape and assault by penetration, including considerations for domestic abuse.

Sentencing Council Definitive Guidelines; Domestic Abuse: Overarching Principles

Life sentences are a sentence of last resort under section 285 of the Sentencing Code, unless specific criteria are met.

Attorney-General’s Reference (No 27 of 2013) (R v Burinskas)

The principle of totality must be applied when sentencing for multiple offences.

Sentencing Council Definitive Guideline on Totality

Outcomes

The Court of Appeal granted the Attorney General's application.

The 24-year custodial sentence was deemed too low given the gravity of the offences. The judge's decision not to impose a life sentence was upheld, but the custodial sentence was increased to reflect the overall seriousness of the crimes.

The original sentence was substituted with an extended sentence of 38 years (30 years custody, 8 years extended licence).

The increased custodial sentence of 30 years better reflects the severity and totality of the respondent's crimes against multiple victims.

Similar Cases

Caselaw Digest Caselaw Digest

UK Case Law Digest provides comprehensive summaries of the latest judgments from the United Kingdom's courts. Our mission is to make case law more accessible and understandable for legal professionals and the public.

Stay Updated

Subscribe to our newsletter for the latest case law updates and legal insights.

© 2025 UK Case Law Digest. All rights reserved.

Information provided without warranty. Not intended as legal advice.