Two teenagers, Tyler and D, were convicted of murder. Tyler got a longer sentence than D. Tyler appealed, arguing it was unfair. The court said the judge considered Tyler's difficult life, but any problem wasn't because Tyler's sentence was too harsh, but because D's might have been too light.
Key Facts
- •Tyler Hunt (born 20 June 2005) and D (born 19 January 2008) were convicted of murder.
- •They planned and executed the murder of Owen Dunn using machetes.
- •Hunt was sentenced to 18 years and 63 days minimum term, while D received 11 years and 81 days.
- •Hunt appealed his sentence arguing disparity with D's sentence.
- •Hunt had a difficult childhood and showed immaturity while D had a supportive family and was considered bright.
Legal Principles
Sentencing of young offenders for murder involving weapons, considering age and culpability.
Schedule 21, paragraph 5A of the Sentencing Code; R v Taylor [2007] EWCA Crim 803; Attorney General References Nos 143 and 144 (R v Brown and Carty) [2007] EWCA Crim 1245; R v Kamarra-Jara [2024] EWCA Crim 198.
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The court found that the sentencing judge appropriately considered the mitigating factors relating to Hunt's background and immaturity within the framework of paragraph 5A of Schedule 21. Any disparity in sentencing was attributed to potential leniency in D's sentence, not an excessive sentence for Hunt.