Matthew, R. v [2026] EWCA Crim 284 (10 February 2026)

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.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 11
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Respondent

Prosper Matthew

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Appeal Judgment

  1. 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. 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.