R v Mutede (Lindiwe)

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
CourtCourt of Appeal (Criminal Division)
JudgeMR JUSTICE CRESSWELL
Judgment Date01 December 2005
Neutral Citation[2005] EWCA Crim 3208
Docket NumberNo: 200505512 A1
Date01 December 2005

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION

Royal Courts of Justice

Strand

London, WC2

Before:

Lord Justice Gage

Mr Justice Cresswell

His Honour Judge Goldsack QC

(Sitting As A Judge Of The Court Of Appeal Criminal Division)

No: 200505512 A1

Regina
and
Lindiwe Mutede

MR S AKINSANYA appeared on behalf of the APPELLANT

MR JUSTICE CRESSWELL
1

On 11th August this year at Luton Magistrates' Court, the appellant, who is aged 35, pleaded guilty and was committed to the Crown Court for sentence. On 9th September, at the Luton Crown Court, she was sentenced by Mr Recorder Blackford as follows: offence 1, possession of a false instrument with intent, 14 months' imprisonment; offence 2, obtaining a pecuniary advantage by deception, 14 months' imprisonment concurrent. Thus the total sentence amounted to 14 months' imprisonment. She appeals against sentence by leave of the single judge.

2

On 5th August this year police officers executed a search warrant at an address in Luton. The appellant was present and in her possession the officers found letters from the office of Immigration and Nationality Directorate, purporting to give her permission to stay and seek employment in the United Kingdom. Those letters were examined and found to be counterfeit. An immigration officer present at the search confirmed that the appellant was prohibited from seeking employment in the United Kingdom.

3

The officers also found a number of pay slips in the appellant's name. She had given a National Insurance number to her employer to obtain that employment. A counterfeit National Insurance card in her name was recovered.

4

Enquiries at her employers revealed that the appellant had worked from 16th July 2004 until 5th August 2005 as a care worker. Her employment was terminated on 5th August when the company was informed of her immigration status. As a result of her employment, she had been paid a total of £16,182.

5

When interviewed, the appellant immediately admitted that she had obtained the immigration letters to enable her to work and that was the reason she had also obtained the National Insurance card. She also admitted that she knew she was prohibited from working in this country and that she had deceived her employers.

6

The appellant is a Zimbabwean national of previous...

Get this document and AI-powered insights with a free trial of vLex and Vincent AI

Get Started for Free

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex

Start Your Free Trial of vLex and Vincent AI, Your Precision-Engineered Legal Assistant

  • Access comprehensive legal content with no limitations across vLex's unparalleled global legal database

  • Build stronger arguments with verified citations and CERT citator that tracks case history and precedential strength

  • Transform your legal research from hours to minutes with Vincent AI's intelligent search and analysis capabilities

  • Elevate your practice by focusing your expertise where it matters most while Vincent handles the heavy lifting

vLex
18 cases
  • R v Valerie Ekiuwa Ovieriakhi
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 26 February 2009
    ...even on a guilty plea by a person of good character, would be within the range of twelve to eighteen months. 9 In R v Mutede [2005] EWCA Crim 3208, [2006] 2 Cr App R(S) 2, the appellant had pleaded guilty to possession of a false instrument with intent and to obtaining a pecuniary advantage......
  • R v Carneiro (Rosiene Ribeiro)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 5 September 2007
    ... ... Subsequently his attention was drawn to the decision of this court in the case of Mutede [2006] 2 Cr App R (S) 22. In the light of that decision the judge had the case re-listed and reduced the sentence to one of six months' imprisonment ... ...
  • R v Kozhem Nawzad Noori
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 18 December 2025
    ...category of case, of which Kolawole is a well-known example, is treated more severely than the latter category, of which R v Mutede [2005] EWCA Crim 3208, [2006] 2 Cr App R(S) 2section 4(1) and (2) of the Identity Documents Act 2010. He was sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment. A statutory......
  • The Queen v Stephen
    • Grenada
    • High Court (Grenada)
    • 11 December 2017
    ...14, CA. 12 For cases involving a conspiracy see R. v. Velev [2009] 1 Cr.App.R.(S.) 96, CA. 13 [2009] EWCA Crim 452. 14 See Above. 15 [2005] EWCA Crim 3208, [2006] 2 Cr.App.R.(S.) 16 [2007] EWCA Crim 878. 17 Not all the aggravating factors have been listed, but there are factors such as leng......
  • Get Started for Free