REGINA v ALFIE ATHERTON

REGINA v ALFIE ATHERTON

The sentences imposed were manifestly excessive due to incorrect categorisation of harm under the Sentencing Council Guideline; the offences should have been treated as Category 2, not Category 1, resulting in reduced sentences for both appellants.

Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Alfie Atherton; Appellant: Reed Roberts
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome
appeals allowed in part
Legal Topics
Robbery, Sentencing, Appeal, Attempted Burglary, Possession of Bladed Article
Criminal Law Robbery Sentencing Appeal Attempted Burglary Possession of Bladed Article

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 5 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Alfie Atherton

Appellant

Reed Roberts

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentences imposed on Atherton and Roberts were manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Proper categorisation of the robbery offences under the Sentencing Council Guideline
  3. 3 Appropriate credit for guilty pleas

Ratio Decidendi

The sentences imposed were manifestly excessive due to incorrect categorisation of harm under the Sentencing Council Guideline; the offences should have been treated as Category 2, not Category 1, resulting in reduced sentences for both appellants.

Court Disposition

appeals allowed in part

Orders

  • Atherton's sentence on count 1 quashed and substituted with nine years' imprisonment
  • Roberts' sentence on count 1 quashed and substituted with five years and six months' imprisonment