R v John Edward Butterworth & Anor
The sentencing judges were entitled to find that the assaults were sustained or repeated, properly categorising the offences as category 1 under the 2011 guideline. Subsequent Sentencing Council materials and case law did not alter the guidance applicable at the time of sentencing. The sentences were not manifestly excessive.
- Parties
- Appellant: John Edward Butterworth; Appellant: Richard Grant; Respondent: Crown
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 12 October 2022
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeals dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing Guidelines, Grievous Bodily Harm, Manifestly Excessive Sentence, Interpretation of Sentencing Guidelines
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
John Edward Butterworth
Appellant
Richard Grant
Appellant
Crown
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive due to misapplication of the 2011 sentencing guideline for section 18 offences
- 2 Whether subsequent Sentencing Council materials and case law affect interpretation of 'sustained or repeated assault' in the guideline
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judges were entitled to find that the assaults were sustained or repeated, properly categorising the offences as category 1 under the 2011 guideline. Subsequent Sentencing Council materials and case law did not alter the guidance applicable at the time of sentencing. The sentences were not manifestly excessive.
Court Disposition
appeals dismissed
Orders
- Each appeal fails and is dismissed.
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