R v Steven Arthur Connolly

R v Steven Arthur Connolly

The notional sentences imposed exceeded the appropriate range without sufficient justification; the aggravating factors and totality principles did not warrant such a substantial uplift beyond the guideline range. The appropriate sentence after plea discount is 20 months on each count, to run concurrently.

Parties
Appellant: Steven Arthur Connolly; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 October 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Sentence Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Possession of Bladed Article, Affray, Appeal Against Sentence
Criminal Law Sentencing Possession of Bladed Article Affray 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 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Steven Arthur Connolly

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the notional sentence before discount for plea was too high
  2. 2 Whether the judge failed to take sufficient account of the age of previous convictions

Ratio Decidendi

The notional sentences imposed exceeded the appropriate range without sufficient justification; the aggravating factors and totality principles did not warrant such a substantial uplift beyond the guideline range. The appropriate sentence after plea discount is 20 months on each count, to run concurrently.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Sentences of 28 months on count 1 and 24 months on count 2 quashed
  • Replaced with 20 months on each count, to run concurrently