Langton, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1668 (11 December 2024)

Langton, R. v [2024] EWCA Crim 1668 (11 December 2024)

The sentencing judge was correct to categorise the offence as culpability category A due to the sustained period of offending and the seriousness of the underlying offence, even though the appellant did not know about the underlying robbery. The notional sentence of 18 months before reduction for guilty plea was within the permissible range and not manifestly excessive. The judge was entitled to refuse suspension of the sentence given the seriousness of the offence and the established principle that such offences almost always require immediate custody.

Citation
[2024] EWCA Crim 1668
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Lacey Langton
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 December 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Perverting the Course of Justice, Possession of False Identity Documents, Sentencing Guidelines, Suspension of Sentence
Criminal Law Perverting the Course of Justice Possession of False Identity Documents Sentencing Guidelines Suspension of 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 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Lacey Langton

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in categorising culpability as category A under the sentencing guideline for perverting the course of justice
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
  3. 3 Whether the sentence should have been suspended

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge was correct to categorise the offence as culpability category A due to the sustained period of offending and the seriousness of the underlying offence, even though the appellant did not know about the underlying robbery. The notional sentence of 18 months before reduction for guilty plea was within the permissible range and not manifestly excessive. The judge was entitled to refuse suspension of the sentence given the seriousness of the offence and the established principle that such offences almost always require immediate custody.

Court Disposition

appeal dismissed