Conteh, R v

Conteh, R v

The sentence of 4 years' imprisonment was unduly lenient given the number and seriousness of offences, aggravating factors, and guideline starting points; the appropriate overall sentence should have been 6 years after credit for plea.

Parties
Applicant: Attorney General; Respondent/offender: David Conteh
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Reference / Appeal Against Sentence Under S.36 Criminal Justice Act 1988
Outcome
Sentence increased on counts 5 and 7; appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Robbery, Offensive Weapons, Unduly Lenient Sentence
Criminal Law Sentencing Robbery Offensive Weapons Unduly Lenient Sentence

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

Parties

Attorney General

Applicant

David Conteh

Respondent/offender

Procedural Posture

Criminal Reference / Appeal Against Sentence Under S.36 Criminal Justice Act 1988

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed for multiple robberies and offensive weapon offences was unduly lenient

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence of 4 years' imprisonment was unduly lenient given the number and seriousness of offences, aggravating factors, and guideline starting points; the appropriate overall sentence should have been 6 years after credit for plea.

Court Disposition

Sentence increased on counts 5 and 7; appeal allowed.

Orders

  • Sentence of 4 years' imprisonment on counts 5 and 7 quashed.
  • Substituted terms of 6 years' imprisonment on counts 5 and 7.