Khan, R v [2020] EWCA Crim 1432 (08 October 2020)

Khan, R v [2020] EWCA Crim 1432 (08 October 2020)

The aggregate sentence of seven years and nine months was just and proportionate given the seriousness, planning, and persistence of the offending; the reduction for guilty plea and for youth was appropriate; the principle of totality was properly applied; and the sentences were not manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle.

Citation
[2020] EWCA Crim 1432
Parties
Prosecution: Regina; Appellant: Hamas Khan
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
08 October 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Domestic Burglary, Conspiracy to Burgle, Totality Principle, Credit for Guilty Plea, Youth Sentencing
Criminal Law Sentencing Domestic Burglary Conspiracy to Burgle Totality Principle Credit for Guilty Plea Youth Sentencing

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 4 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 14
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecution

Hamas Khan

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the aggregate sentence of seven years and nine months was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the sentence for conspiracy to burgle should have been shorter having regard to totality
  3. 3 Whether greater credit should have been given for the late guilty plea

Ratio Decidendi

The aggregate sentence of seven years and nine months was just and proportionate given the seriousness, planning, and persistence of the offending; the reduction for guilty plea and for youth was appropriate; the principle of totality was properly applied; and the sentences were not manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Renewed applications for extension of time and for leave to appeal against the first indictment sentence refused.
  • Appeal against sentence on the second indictment dismissed.