Larkin, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1222 (24 June 2025)

Larkin, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 1222 (24 June 2025)

The original sentence was unduly lenient because the judge failed to properly categorise the harm as category 1 (very serious alarm or distress with substantial adverse effect), did not follow the correct process under the Sentencing Council guideline, and gave excessive credit for a very late guilty plea. The...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Crim 1222
Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent/offender: Jason Larkin
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
24 June 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (attorney General's Reference) / Appeal Against Sentence Under Section 36 Criminal Justice Act 1988
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence increased
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Domestic Abuse, Controlling or Coercive Behaviour, Attorney General's Reference, Serious Crime Act 2015
Criminal Law Sentencing Domestic Abuse Controlling or Coercive Behaviour Attorney General's Reference Serious Crime Act 2015

Source-derived case record

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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

Jason Larkin

Respondent/offender

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (attorney General's Reference) / Appeal Against Sentence Under Section 36 Criminal Justice Act 1988

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the original sentence for controlling or coercive behaviour was unduly lenient
  2. 2 Proper categorisation of harm and culpability under Sentencing Council guidelines
  3. 3 Appropriate credit for late guilty plea

Ratio Decidendi

The original sentence was unduly lenient because the judge failed to properly categorise the harm as category 1 (very serious alarm or distress with substantial adverse effect), did not follow the correct process under the Sentencing Council guideline, and gave excessive credit for a very late guilty plea. The appropriate sentence, after proper categorisation and a 10% reduction for the late plea, was two years' imprisonment.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence increased

Orders

  • Original sentence of 43 weeks' imprisonment quashed
  • Substituted sentence of two years' imprisonment imposed