North, R. v [2019] EWCA Crim 282 (20 February 2019)

North, R. v [2019] EWCA Crim 282 (20 February 2019)

The original sentence was unduly lenient given the seriousness of the offences, the vulnerability of the victim, and the aggravating features. Even with full credit for guilty pleas and mitigation, a total sentence of only two years suspended was manifestly inadequate. The appropriate sentence, applying the guidelines and totality principle, was four years' immediate imprisonment.

Citation
[2019] EWCA Crim 282
Parties
Prosecutor: Regina (The Crown); Offender: Sherie Leigh North
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
20 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (reference by Attorney General) / Appeal Against Sentence Under S.36 Criminal Justice Act 1988
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence quashed as unduly lenient; substituted sentence of four years' imprisonment imposed.
Legal Topics
Robbery, Sentencing, Attorney General's Reference, Unduly Lenient Sentence, Vulnerable Victim, Suspended Sentence, Totality Principle
Criminal Law Robbery Sentencing Attorney General's Reference Unduly Lenient Sentence Vulnerable Victim Suspended Sentence Totality Principle

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina (The Crown)

Prosecutor

Sherie Leigh North

Offender

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (reference by Attorney General) / Appeal Against Sentence Under S.36 Criminal Justice Act 1988

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed on Sherie Leigh North was unduly lenient
  2. 2 Proper categorisation of the offences under the Sentencing Council's Robbery Guidelines
  3. 3 Appropriate sentence for joint robbery and attempted robbery involving a vulnerable victim

Ratio Decidendi

The original sentence was unduly lenient given the seriousness of the offences, the vulnerability of the victim, and the aggravating features. Even with full credit for guilty pleas and mitigation, a total sentence of only two years suspended was manifestly inadequate. The appropriate sentence, applying the guidelines and totality principle, was four years' immediate imprisonment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence quashed as unduly lenient; substituted sentence of four years' imprisonment imposed.

Orders

  • Quash original suspended sentences.
  • Impose eight months' imprisonment for count 1 (shop robbery).