REGINA v BRODIE ROBERT GROOME

REGINA v BRODIE ROBERT GROOME

The judge was entitled to place the offence into category B but should have made a downwards adjustment to the starting point to reflect the circumstances. The sentence of 13 years was manifestly excessive; a sentence of 10 years' imprisonment was appropriate.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Brodie Robert Groome; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
13 April 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed; sentence reduced
Legal Topics
Manslaughter, Sentencing, Unlawful Act, Culpability Assessment
Criminal Law Manslaughter Sentencing Unlawful Act Culpability Assessment

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

Parties

Brodie Robert Groome

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence of 13 years' imprisonment for manslaughter was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Proper categorisation of culpability under the Sentencing Council's guideline for unlawful act manslaughter

Ratio Decidendi

The judge was entitled to place the offence into category B but should have made a downwards adjustment to the starting point to reflect the circumstances. The sentence of 13 years was manifestly excessive; a sentence of 10 years' imprisonment was appropriate.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; sentence reduced

Orders

  • Sentence of 13 years' imprisonment quashed
  • Substituted sentence of 10 years' imprisonment imposed