Dalkin, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 117 (28 January 2025)
The sentence imposed was manifestly excessive because the judge failed to properly account for the applicant's age, lack of maturity, significant mitigation, and progress since the offence. The appropriate sentence after trial would have been 6 years, reduced to 5 years 8 months for plea. The appeal was allowed and the sentence substituted accordingly.
- Citation
- [2025] EWCA Crim 117
- Parties
- Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Brandon Dalkin
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 28 January 2025
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal allowed
- Legal Topics
- Robbery, Sentencing, Mitigation, Appeal Procedure, Extension of Time
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Prosecution
Brandon Dalkin
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive given the mitigation and circumstances
- 2 Whether the judge failed to properly account for mitigation, delay, and credit for plea
- 3 Whether the starting point for sentence was too high
Ratio Decidendi
The sentence imposed was manifestly excessive because the judge failed to properly account for the applicant's age, lack of maturity, significant mitigation, and progress since the offence. The appropriate sentence after trial would have been 6 years, reduced to 5 years 8 months for plea. The appeal was allowed and the sentence substituted accordingly.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed
Orders
- Extension of time granted
- Leave to appeal granted
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