Boateng, R v

Boateng, R v

The sentencing judge failed to give sufficient weight to the appellant’s youth and the principle of totality. The sentences for counts 2 and 4 should run concurrently, and sentences for counts 1, 3, and 5 should be reduced, resulting in a total sentence of twenty months’ detention in a young offender institution.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Aaron Boateng
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
15 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; sentence reduced
Legal Topics
Sexual Offences, Sentencing, Youth Offenders, Totality Principle
Criminal Law Sexual Offences Sentencing Youth Offenders 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 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Aaron Boateng

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge gave sufficient weight to the appellant's youth and the principle of totality in sentencing for multiple sexual offences.

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge failed to give sufficient weight to the appellant’s youth and the principle of totality. The sentences for counts 2 and 4 should run concurrently, and sentences for counts 1, 3, and 5 should be reduced, resulting in a total sentence of twenty months’ detention in a young offender institution.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; sentence reduced

Orders

  • Consecutive sentence on count 4 quashed and replaced with concurrent sentence of eighteen months’ detention.
  • Sentences on counts 1 and 3 quashed and replaced with two months’ detention each, to run concurrently.