R v Warren Heatley

R v Warren Heatley

The judge erred by taking an unexplained starting point of 21 months before aggravation and plea credit, resulting in a manifestly excessive sentence; the appropriate starting point was 12 months, uplifted by 7 months for aggravation, then reduced by 25% for guilty plea, resulting in a 14-month sentence. Disparity with Kiely's sentence was justified by material differences in conduct, plea timing, age, and prior convictions.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex; Appellant: Warren Heatley
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Sentence Appeal
Outcome
appeal allowed in part
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Burglary, Disparity, Suspended Sentence Activation

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 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Prosecution

Warren Heatley

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Sentence Appeal

  1. 1 Whether the 21-month sentence for burglary was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether there was unjustified disparity between the appellant's sentence and that of co-defendant Kiely

Ratio Decidendi

The judge erred by taking an unexplained starting point of 21 months before aggravation and plea credit, resulting in a manifestly excessive sentence; the appropriate starting point was 12 months, uplifted by 7 months for aggravation, then reduced by 25% for guilty plea, resulting in a 14-month sentence. Disparity with Kiely's sentence was justified by material differences in conduct, plea timing, age, and prior convictions.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed in part

Orders

  • Sentence of 21 months quashed and replaced with 14 months for burglary
  • Activated suspended sentence of 7 months to run consecutively