Court of Appeal Upholds Sentence in R v Mark Green: Key Issue on Culpability and Guilty Plea Credit Evaluated

Citation: [2023] EWCA Crim 1567
Judgment on


In the case of R v Mark Green, the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) considered an appeal against sentence in relation to a conviction for manslaughter arising from a street altercation. This article aims to dissect the Court’s judgment and explicate the judicial reasoning applied to the key legal principles that determined the outcome.

Key Facts

The appellant, Mark Green, was involved in an incident resulting in the death of Anthony Armstrong following a single punch which led to a fatal injury. Green was initially charged with section 18 wounding with intent but after Armstrong’s death, was charged and pleaded guilty to manslaughter. The sentencing judge categorized the offence as falling under Category B for high culpability due to the force of the punch and the foreseeable high risk of grievous bodily harm. The sentence of eight years’ imprisonment factored in Green’s previous convictions for violence, his initial lie to the police about the circumstances of the incident, and the trial judge’s assessment of the appellant’s culpability.

Culpability and Sentence Categorization

The key issue in this appeal was the categorization of manslaughter under the Sentencing Council guidelines. The judge at the original sentencing found it to fall under Category B high culpability, as it stemmed from an unlawful act—a very hard punch with an obvious risk of causing significant harm. According to the relevant Sentencing Council guideline, Category B high culpability carries a starting point of 12 years custody.

Credit for Guilty Plea

Another significant legal principle in the appeal related to the level of credit awarded for the appellant’s guilty plea. The standard procedure is to grant a one-third reduction for early guilty pleas. However, in this case, the full one-third reduction was not awarded because the appellant did not make an unequivocal indication of a guilty plea at the earliest opportunity when the case first appeared in the magistrates’ court.

Consideration of Precedent

The Court of Appeal referenced the preceding case of R v Plaku [2021] EWCA Crim 568, which provided guidance on credit for guilty pleas, requiring an unequivocal indication at the earliest opportunity. The judgment also mentioned R v Pool [2023] EWCA Crim 946, where a similar single-punch manslaughter case led to a reduced sentence due to particular features of mitigation that were not present in Green’s case.


The Court of Appeal concluded that the original judge was correct in the following determinations:

  • Categorizing the offence under Category B for high culpability.
  • The punch carried a high risk of grievous bodily harm, even if the appellant had not considered the consequences.
  • A sentence of 10 years and 8 months before credit for the guilty plea was appropriate, after balancing aggravating and mitigating factors.
  • The reduction for the guilty plea was correctly set at 25% instead of one-third due to the lack of an unequivocal early indication of guilt.

Thus, the Court dismissed the appeal, upholding the eight-year sentence.


In R v Mark Green, the Court of Appeal’s dismissal of the appeal reinforces the necessity for defendants to provide a clear and prompt admission of responsibility if they are to benefit from the maximum credit for a guilty plea. Furthermore, the case illustrates the rigorous approach taken by the courts in assessing culpability based on the Sentencing Council’s guidelines of an offender’s actions’ inherent risk of harm. This judgment therefore serves as a pertinent exemplar of the application of sentencing principles in cases of manslaughter arising from one-off violent acts.

Related Summaries