De Silva v R

De Silva v R

The minimum term of 32 years was manifestly excessive for a 19-year-old offender, given his age and the statutory guidance. The sentence should reflect seriousness but also consider youth as a mitigating factor. The minimum term is reduced to 28 years.

Parties
Appellant: Aaron De Silva; Respondent: R
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Murder, Aggravated Burglary, Youth Offenders, Personality Disorder
Criminal Law Sentencing Murder Aggravated Burglary Youth Offenders Personality Disorder

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Aaron De Silva

Appellant

R

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Renewed Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the minimum term of 32 years for murder was manifestly excessive for a 19-year-old offender with a personality disorder and unhappy social history
  2. 2 Whether aggravating and mitigating factors were properly considered in sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

The minimum term of 32 years was manifestly excessive for a 19-year-old offender, given his age and the statutory guidance. The sentence should reflect seriousness but also consider youth as a mitigating factor. The minimum term is reduced to 28 years.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • minimum term of 32 years quashed
  • minimum term of 28 years substituted