Gomez, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 342 (06 March 2025)

Gomez, R. v [2025] EWCA Crim 342 (06 March 2025)

The original sentence was unduly lenient given the seriousness and aggravating factors of the offence; a sentence after trial of at least 8½ years was appropriate, reduced to 7 years 6 months for mitigation, and then to 5 years (60 months) after a full third discount for plea. The judge was entitled to consider...

Source-derived case information.

Citation
[2025] EWCA Crim 342
Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Respondent: Tyrell Gomez
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
06 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (attorney General's Reference) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Unduly Lenient Sentence Reference
Outcome
Reference allowed in part; sentence increased.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Wounding With Intent, Breach of Restraining Order, Unduly Lenient Sentence, Dangerousness Assessment, Mitigation, Plea Discount
Criminal Law Sentencing Wounding With Intent Breach of Restraining Order Unduly Lenient Sentence Dangerousness Assessment Mitigation Plea Discount

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 4 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Tyrell Gomez

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (attorney General's Reference) / Court of Appeal Judgment on Unduly Lenient Sentence Reference

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the original sentence for wounding with intent and breach of restraining order was unduly lenient
  2. 2 Whether the judge erred in considering mental health as mitigation
  3. 3 Whether a full third discount for plea was appropriate

Ratio Decidendi

The original sentence was unduly lenient given the seriousness and aggravating factors of the offence; a sentence after trial of at least 8½ years was appropriate, reduced to 7 years 6 months for mitigation, and then to 5 years (60 months) after a full third discount for plea. The judge was entitled to consider mental health as mitigation but not as reducing culpability. The judge was not wrong in not finding dangerousness or imposing an extended sentence.

Court Disposition

Reference allowed in part; sentence increased.

Orders

  • Sentence on count 1 (wounding with intent) increased from 4 years to 5 years' imprisonment.
  • Concurrent sentence of 3 months for breach of restraining order to remain.