R v Adam Smith

R v Adam Smith

The appropriate sentence for persistent non-domestic burglary, considering the appellant's extensive criminal history, is at the top of the category 1B range, but not as high as three years; the sentence should not be suspended due to lack of motivation and repeated non-compliance.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Adam Smith
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
17 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Non Domestic Burglary, Suspended Sentences, Sentencing Council Guidelines
Criminal Law Sentencing Non Domestic Burglary Suspended Sentences Sentencing Council Guidelines

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 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Adam Smith

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentences passed were consistent with the Sentencing Council guideline for offences of non-domestic burglary
  2. 2 Whether the judge was correct to decide not to suspend the sentences of imprisonment

Ratio Decidendi

The appropriate sentence for persistent non-domestic burglary, considering the appellant's extensive criminal history, is at the top of the category 1B range, but not as high as three years; the sentence should not be suspended due to lack of motivation and repeated non-compliance.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Four concurrent sentences of two years’ imprisonment quashed
  • Four concurrent sentences each of 16 months’ imprisonment substituted