R v Anandarajah Bremakumar
[2023] EWCA Crim 545
R v WK
14 December 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 1678
Court of Appeal
A court increased a criminal's sentence to 16 years but made a mistake in explaining how those 16 years were made up of different crimes. This new judgment fixes that mistake, clarifying exactly how the sentence is calculated, ensuring the criminal serves the intended 16 years.
Key Facts
- •Appeal on Attorney General's Reference under Section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
- •Original sentence: 12 years' imprisonment with a one-year extended licence period.
- •Appeal increased sentence to 16 years' imprisonment with a one-year extended licence period.
- •Lack of clarity in the judgment regarding the breakdown of concurrent and consecutive sentences.
- •Ambiguity concerning the offender's release date.
Legal Principles
Section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 allows for Attorney General's References.
Attorney General's Reference
Section 236A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 relates to sentencing.
Original sentencing decision
Outcomes
Paragraph 31 of the judgment and paragraphs (3) and (4) of the order were adjusted to clarify the sentence breakdown.
To rectify the lack of clarity and ambiguity regarding the sentence and release date, ensuring the court's intended 16-year custodial term is implemented.
Sentence on count 22: 18 months' imprisonment, consecutive.
To achieve the 16-year total custodial sentence.
Sentences on counts 26 and 32: 6.5 years' imprisonment, consecutive (concurrent inter se).
To achieve the 16-year total custodial sentence.
Sentence on count 23: 4 years' imprisonment, concurrent.
To achieve the 16-year total custodial sentence.