R C v SUSSEX (CENTRAL) MAGISTRATES' COURT
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | MR JUSTICE PITCHFORD,LORD JUSTICE SCOTT BAKER |
| Judgment Date | 30 April 2003 |
| Neutral Citation | [2003] EWHC 1157 (Admin) |
| Court | Queen's Bench Division (Administrative Court) |
| Docket Number | CO/49224/2002 |
| Date | 30 April 2003 |
[2003] EWHC 1157 (Admin)
IN THE HIGH COURT OF JUSTICE
QUEEN'S BENCH DIVISION
DIVISIONAL COURT
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand
London WC2
Mr Justice Scott Baker
Mr Justice Pitchford
CO/49224/2002
MR A SELBY (instructed by Tremletts Solicitors, 69 Grand Parade, Brighton BN2 9TS) appeared on behalf of the CLAIMANT
THE DEFENDANT DID NOT APPEAR AND WAS NOT REPRESENTED
This is an application to quash a decision of Brighton Youth Court made on 16th August 2002 declining jurisdiction to try this applicant upon charges of burglary and criminal damage and committing him instead to Lewes Crown Court for trial.
I shall call the applicant C, the single judge having made an order under section 39 of the Children and Young Persons Act 1933.
C was born on 9th July 1987. The prosecution case against him is that on 2nd June 2002 (when he was still aged 14) he and three others, aged between 11 and 15, entered as trespassers a dwelling house in Brighton and stole property to a value of £125. While inside the house, for upwards of an hour, they caused substantial damage by a variety of means; most distressing to the occupiers was the destruction of goldfish and defecation upon the living room carpet. In short, the culprits engaged in the despoilation of a family home, the occupants of which were known to them and known by them to be away on holiday.
On 16th August 2002 C, together with two co-accused, appeared before Brighton Youth Court. The prosecution represented that these were grave crimes, the damage serving to aggravate the burglary of a dwelling house at night. Drawn to the justices' attention were the authorities of Winn [1995] 16 Cr App R (S) 53 and Brewster and Others [1998] 1 Cr App R (S) 181. In Winn the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) upheld the sentence of five years' imprisonment upon a 26-year-old man for burglary and theft of property worth £2,500 at a dwelling. Damage of the kind which accompanied this burglary was also committed. The appellant had seven previous court appearances, none for burglary, and had served a previous custodial sentence.
Brewster was the guideline case in which Lord Bingham, CJ, gave guidelines in sentencing burglary cases. After a trial an adult defendant could expect a sentence of three years' imprisonment for burglary of an unoccupied dwelling.
Notwithstanding objections from advocates for the defendants, the justices were persuaded to decline jurisdiction under section 24(1)(a) Magistrates' Court 1980. When C and others appeared in the Crown Court on 27th September 2002 for a plea and directions hearing, HHJ Brown granted an adjournment for consideration of this application. Permission to proceed was granted by Lightman J on 5th December 2002. The Crown Prosecution Service, having been served with the papers, indicated that it did not wish to contest the application. Section 24(1)(a) of the Act of 1980 reads as follows:
"Where a person under the age of 18 appears or is brought before a magistrates' court on an information charging him with an indictable offence other than homicide, he shall be tried summarily unless-
(a) the offence is such as is mentioned in subsection ( 1) or (2) of section 91 of the Powers of Criminal Court (Sentencing) Act 2000 (under which young persons convicted on indictment of certain grave crimes may be sentenced to be detained for long periods) and the court considers that if he is found guilty of the offence it ought to be possible to sentence him in pursuance of subsection (3) of that section."
"Grave offences" for this purpose are defined by section 91(1) of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000, they include:
"… (a) an offence punishable in the case of a person aged 18 or over with imprisonment for 14 years or more, not being an offence the sentence for which is fixed by law …."
Burglary is such an offence. That being the case, the justices were empowered by section 1A Magistrates' Court Act 1980 to commit both the charge of burglary and the charge of criminal damage for trial at the Crown Court, provided the justices were satisfied it ought to be possible to sentence under section 91 of the Act of 2000.
Section 91(3) provides:
"If the court is of the opinion that none of the other methods in which the case may legally be dealt with is suitable, the court may sentence the offender to be detained for such period, not exceeding the maximum term of imprisonment with which the offence is punishable in the case of a person aged 18 or over, as may be specified in the sentence."
The correct approach to the exercise of the power under section 24(1) Magistrates' Court Act 1980 has been considered by this court in several previous cases, recently and notably R (On the Application of D) v Manchester City Youth Court [2002] 1 Cr App R (S) 573; R (On the Application of W) and Thetford Youth Justices v Director of Public Prosecutions, together with R (On the Application of M) v Waltham Forest Youth Court Justices and the Director of Public Prosecutions [2002] EWHC 152 Admin, and R (On the Application of W) v Southampton Youth Court, together with R (On the Application...
To continue reading
Request your trial