R v Daryl Hood

The sentence for intentional strangulation was manifestly excessive compared to guidance in R v Cook; a sentence at trial of 30 months (20 months after credit) was appropriate. The sentence for controlling/coercive behaviour was not excessive. Consecutive sentences for two serious separate offences were justified. Totality was properly considered.

Parties: Prosecutor: Rex; Appellant: Daryl Hood
Jurisdiction: England and Wales
Judgment Date: 15 October 2024
Procedural Posture: Criminal Appeal / Judgment
Outcome: appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics: Sentencing, Intentional Strangulation, Controlling or Coercive Behaviour, Common Assault, Possession of Controlled Drugs, Obstructing a Constable

Criminal Law Sentencing Intentional Strangulation Controlling or Coercive Behaviour Common Assault Possession of Controlled Drugs Obstructing a Constable

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6

Parties

Rex

Prosecutor

Daryl Hood

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment

Legal Issues

1 Whether the sentences for intentional strangulation and controlling/coercive behaviour were manifestly excessive
2 Whether the Learned Recorder properly considered totality in ordering consecutive sentences

Ratio Decidendi

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

Sentence of 28 months for intentional strangulation quashed and substituted with 20 months' imprisonment.
Total sentence reduced to 41 months' imprisonment.