Matthew, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 284 (10 February 2026)
The sentencing judge was entitled to impose a custodial sentence for the sequence of criminal events, having considered the seriousness of the offending, the possibility of a non-custodial sentence, and the relevant statutory and guideline principles, even though there was no explicit reference to the imposition guidelines in the sentencing remarks.
- Citation
- [2026] EWCA Crim 284
- Parties
- Respondent: Rex; Appellant: Prosper Matthew
- Jurisdiction
- England and Wales
- Judgment Date
- 10 February 2026
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Robbery, Assault With Intent to Rob, Young Offenders, Sentencing Guidelines, Appeal Against Sentence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Rex
Respondent
Prosper Matthew
Appellant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to explicitly consider and apply the community and custodial sentence imposition guidelines under section 230 of the Sentencing Act 2020
- 2 Whether the sentence of 19 months' custody was wrong in principle or manifestly excessive for a young offender
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge was entitled to impose a custodial sentence for the sequence of criminal events, having considered the seriousness of the offending, the possibility of a non-custodial sentence, and the relevant statutory and guideline principles, even though there was no explicit reference to the imposition guidelines in the sentencing remarks.
Court Disposition
appeal dismissed
Orders
- The appeal against sentence 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