AIB, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 422 (26 April 2024)
The sentencing judge erred in failing to give sufficient weight to the appellant's assistance as a CHIS, as evidenced by the recent 'text' confirming substantial and reliable information provided, financial rewards, and credible risk to life. Applying the principles in R v Royle & ors, a reduction of approximately 40% is appropriate, resulting in a total sentence of 60 months.
- Citation
- [2024] EWCA Crim 422
- Parties
- Respondent: Rex; Appellant: AIB
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 26 April 2024
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeal against sentence allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing of Informers, Reduction of Sentence for Assistance, Sentencing Guidelines
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Respondent
AIB
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentencing judge gave sufficient regard to the appellant's role as a CHIS (Covert Human Intelligence Source) and the impact of the 'text' confirming assistance and risk.
- 2 Whether the sentence should be reduced in light of recent authoritative guidance on sentencing informers.
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge erred in failing to give sufficient weight to the appellant's assistance as a CHIS, as evidenced by the recent 'text' confirming substantial and reliable information provided, financial rewards, and credible risk to life. Applying the principles in R v Royle & ors, a reduction of approximately 40% is appropriate, resulting in a total sentence of 60 months.
Court Disposition
Appeal against sentence allowed in part
Orders
- Total sentence reduced to 60 months (5 years) imprisonment.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment