R v Gavin Prodger

R v Gavin Prodger

The sentencing judge erred in placing the case in category A of the guideline, as the facts did not justify such a finding; the starting point should have been 10 years, discounted for guilty plea; the evidence did not justify a finding of dangerousness, so an extended sentence was not proper.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Gavin Prodger
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
19 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed in part; sentences quashed and substituted
Legal Topics
Causing Death by Careless Driving, Sentencing Guidelines, Dangerousness Assessment, Drug Offences
Criminal Law Causing Death by Careless Driving Sentencing Guidelines Dangerousness Assessment Drug Offences

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 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Gavin Prodger

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the sentencing judge correct to place the case in category A of the sentencing guideline?
  2. 2 Was the starting point for sentence too high?
  3. 3 Was it proper in principle to impose an extended sentence based on dangerousness?

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred in placing the case in category A of the guideline, as the facts did not justify such a finding; the starting point should have been 10 years, discounted for guilty plea; the evidence did not justify a finding of dangerousness, so an extended sentence was not proper.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part; sentences quashed and substituted

Orders

  • Sentence on count 2 quashed and replaced with 8 years 6 months' imprisonment
  • Sentence on count 3 quashed and replaced with 8 years 6 months' imprisonment concurrent