EWCA Dismisses Appeal Against Custodial Sentence for Rape and Coercive Behavior

Citation: [2024] EWCA Crim 30
Judgment on

Introduction

The case of R v Henry Smith represents an appeal against a custodial sentence for a series of offences including rape, controlling or coercive behavior, burglary, and drug possession. The appeal was heard before Lord Justice Popplewell, Mr Justice Choudhury, and Her Honour Judge Angela Rafferty KC at the EWCA (Criminal) in 2024. This article will dissect the EWCA’s analysis, outline the key facts of the case, elucidate on the legal principles applied, review the outcomes, and conclude with the court’s decision to dismiss the appeal.

Key Facts

Henry Smith, aged 39, initially pleaded guilty to burglary and possession of a class B drug but contested the charges of rape and coercive behavior. However, on the second day of his trial, he changed his plea to guilty. Smith received a sentence totaling 14 years and 10 months’ imprisonment, which included an activation of a suspended sentence for a prior offence.

The court emphasized the severity of Smith’s controlling and coercive behavior towards his then-partner “C”, and the aggravating factor of previous convictions, which included similar offences. Smith’s late guilty plea, on the second day of trial after the victim’s video-recorded evidence was played and while the victim was present in court, led to the judge allowing no credit for the plea.

Several legal principles were critical in the court’s evaluation of the appeal:

  1. Credit for Guilty Plea: The Sentencing Council’s definitive guideline on reduction in sentence for a guilty plea formed the basis for the court’s decision to allow no reduction. This guideline permits a zero credit for a plea entered during a trial.

  2. Aggravating Factors: The court considered Smith’s previous convictions and the nature of the offences he committed, including the sustained abuse and the particular circumstances of the rape which involved additional humiliation for the victim.

  3. Minimum Sentencing for Repeat Offenders: For the burglary conviction, as a third-time offender, Smith was subject to mandatory minimum sentencing unless there were exceptional circumstances, which were not present in this case.

  4. Totality Principle: The Sentencing Council’s guidelines also emphasize the use of the totality principle, ensuring that the total sentence proportionately reflects the overall criminality.

Outcomes

Regarding the grounds of the appeal:

  1. Credit for Guilty Plea: The court upheld the trial judge’s decision to award zero credit for the guilty plea, given that it was entered during the course of the trial and had not relieved the principal witness of the need to attend court.

  2. Double Counting Allegation: The court rejected the appellant’s assertion of double counting for previous violence affecting the culpability assessments. It differentiated the extensive violence over a long period in count 5 from the single instance constituting count 4.

  3. Totality Consideration: The appellate court found that the sentencing judge had appropriately applied the totality principle, with the overall sentence being just and proportionate.

Conclusion

The EWCA in the case of R v Henry Smith carefully examined the presented grounds of appeal and found no error of principle in the original sentencing. The court underscored the importance of adhering to the sentencing guidelines and the judge’s discretion in assessing the applicability of credit for a guilty plea. The EWCA strongly supported the judge’s consideration of the distinct and severe nature of the offences, as well as the appropriate application of the totality principle. Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal, affirming the original sentence of 14 years and 10 months’ imprisonment as neither excessive nor manifestly unjust.