R v Harron Rahman

R v Harron Rahman

The sentence was manifestly excessive due to failure to properly apply the sentencing guidelines, consider the Basis of Plea, personal mitigation, the pre-sentence report, and the appellant's rehabilitation prospects. The appropriate sentence is 18 months' imprisonment, suspended for 24 months, with a Rehabilitation Activity Requirement.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Appellant: Harron Rahman
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
02 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed; sentence quashed and substituted
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Controlled Drugs, Appeal Against Sentence, Mitigation, Suspended Sentence
Criminal Law Sentencing Controlled Drugs Appeal Against Sentence Mitigation Suspended Sentence

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 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Harron Rahman

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judge failed to properly apply the sentencing guidelines and consider mitigation

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence was manifestly excessive due to failure to properly apply the sentencing guidelines, consider the Basis of Plea, personal mitigation, the pre-sentence report, and the appellant's rehabilitation prospects. The appropriate sentence is 18 months' imprisonment, suspended for 24 months, with a Rehabilitation Activity Requirement.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed; sentence quashed and substituted

Orders

  • The sentence of 26 months' imprisonment is quashed.
  • A sentence of 18 months' imprisonment suspended for 24 months is substituted.