R v Mahmood Hussain

R v Mahmood Hussain

The sentencing court was required by section 325 of the Sentencing Act 2020 to specify the credit period for qualifying curfew with electronic monitoring, and failure to do so necessitated correction by the Court of Appeal.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Mahmood Hussain
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
04 November 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Credit for Bail Curfew, Extension of Time, Leave to Appeal
Criminal Law Sentencing Credit for Bail Curfew Extension of Time Leave to Appeal

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Mahmood Hussain

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing court should have directed that the credit period due to the appellant for bail curfew with electronic monitoring count as time served under section 325 of the Sentencing Act 2020

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing court was required by section 325 of the Sentencing Act 2020 to specify the credit period for qualifying curfew with electronic monitoring, and failure to do so necessitated correction by the Court of Appeal.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • 68 days to count towards service of appellant's sentence
  • certificate of conviction to be amended to reflect sentence of four years and six months less 68 days certified pursuant to section 325 of the Sentencing Act 2020