Gwilym, R. v
The Recorder erred in partially apportioning culpability and imposing a consecutive determinate sentence on Count 1. The appropriate sentence should have been calculated afresh, applying the principle of totality and considering aggravating features. The extended sentence remains appropriate, but Count 1 must run concurrently to Count 3.
- Parties
- Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Daniel James Gwilym
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 22 February 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal allowed in part
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Dangerous Offender, Extended Sentence, Racially Aggravated Assault, Domestic Violence, Totality Principle
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina
Prosecution
Daniel James Gwilym
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the Recorder erred in imposing an extended sentence under section 226A of the Criminal Justice Act 2003
- 2 Whether it was appropriate to impose a consecutive determinate sentence on Count 1
- 3 Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive
Ratio Decidendi
The Recorder erred in partially apportioning culpability and imposing a consecutive determinate sentence on Count 1. The appropriate sentence should have been calculated afresh, applying the principle of totality and considering aggravating features. The extended sentence remains appropriate, but Count 1 must run concurrently to Count 3.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed in part
Orders
- Sentence on Count 1 to run concurrently with Count 3
- Extended sentence on Count 3 remains as passed
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