Limiting the Role of Previous Convictions at Sentencing
| DOI | 10.1177/0022018316658184 |
| Published date | 01 August 2016 |
| Date | 01 August 2016 |
| Subject Matter | Court of Appeal |
Court of Appeal
Limiting the Role of Previous
Convictions at Sentencing
RvEvans [2016] EWCA Crim 31
Keywords
Sentencing, previous convictions, proportionality, sentencing guidelines, manifestly excessive
The facts of the case can be stated briefly. The appellant had entered a bookmakers shop and asked the
manager whether he had change for a £20 note. The manager opened the cash register and, finding there
to be no change inside, moved to a second register. At this point, the appellant leaned over the counter,
re-opened the first register and took out £230 in cash. The manager grabbed the appellant in order to stop
his escape, at which point the appellant pushed the manager, causing him to fall to the floor.
The appellant was arrested six months later, whereupon he denied robbery but admitted theft. At the
Crown Court, he pleaded guilty to theft and assault, and was sentenced to two years’ imprisonment for
the theft and three months for the assault, to be served consecutively. The appellant appealed against
sentence on the basis that the trial judge had given excessive weight to his prior record of offending,
which included 25 previous convictions for 67 offences, most of which were for shoplifting and other
dishonesty offences.
HELD, ALLOWING THE APPEAL IN PART, the Court of Appeal was of the view that the
sentence imposed gave undue weight to the appellant’s previous convictions. A sentence beyond
the range prescribed by the relevant guidelines was justified given the appellant’s record, never-
theless, the sentence imposed was excessive. The court quashed the sentence of two years’ impri-
sonment imposed for the theft and substituted a term of 18 months. The three month sentence
imposed for the assault was ordered to stand, but should be served concurrently, as opposed to
consecutively , to the theft sentence. The total term of imprisonment was thereby reduced fromtwo years
and three months to 18 months.
Commentary
Section 143(2) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 purports to grant previous convictions considerable
influence at sentencing. It provides:
In considering the seriousness of an offence (‘the current offence’) by an offender who has one or more
previous convictions, the court must treat each previous conviction as an aggravating factor if (in the case of
that conviction) the court considers that it can reasonably be so treated having regard, in particular, to –
a. The nature of the offence to which the conviction relates and its relevance to the current offence, and
b. The time that has elapsed since the conviction.
The Journal of Criminal Law
2016, Vol. 80(4) 224–236
ªThe Author(s) 2016
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/0022018316658184
clj.sagepub.com
To continue reading
Request your trial