Sentencing guidelines - Personal Mitigating Circumstances – Exceptional Circumstances

221 results

24 February 2025

King v Brian Ruddy

The Northern Ireland Court of Appeal, drawing on previous guidance decisions, specified the broad categories of sentence for a first time offender in fraudulent evasion of customs duty cases (cigarette smuggling) at para [28], along with general guidance at para [29].

DPP application for leave to refer a three-year suspended sentence - fraudulent evasion of customs duty on cigarettes - being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of VAT – whether sentence unduly lenient – whether sentence should have been suspended due to exceptional circumstances pertaining to the defendant’s autistic son - principles in R v Devlin [2023] NICA 71 applied - public interest outweighed the private interests engaged – suspension element quashed – three year sentence affirmed.

[2025] NICA 13 Keegan LCJ

22 November 2024

King v Thomasena Byrne

GENERAL

1. Deterrence means discouraging the offender before the court, and others, from committing offences of the kind in question and/or more generally: paras [8] – [9]

2. Every sentence has an inbuilt element of deterrence (the concept of “general deterrence”): paras [8] – [9] & [11]

3. In some cases the sentencing court may decide that deterrence of the offender and/or the public, in the sense explained in [1] above, requires particular emphasis, the consequence being that a punishment more punitive than would otherwise be merited may follow (the concept of “particular deterrence” / an “expressly deterrent sentence”): paras [11] – [13]

4. In cases belonging to the latter category, adherence to the guidance in QWL paras [102] – [103] is essential: para [14]

5. Where sentencing guidelines decisions of the NICOA incorporate an element of specific (as distinct from general) deterrence, the sentencing court must avoid double counting.

6. “ … an offender’s personal circumstances will rarely qualify to be accorded much weight, particularly in a context where a deterrent sentence is required.” (para [18] quoting QWL para [98] )

THIS CASE

7. In the fact specific context of this case. First, per para [21]

“ … the judge’s approach to the issue of personal mitigation was in substance one of applying an absolute rule and, hence, not compatible with the principles expounded above, in a context of having erroneously declared this to be a case requiring deterrence, without more. The judge should have approached the issue of personal mitigation more flexibly and, having done so, explained the weight which he had determined to allocate to it. The impugned sentencing decision is not to this effect. Furthermore, the judge’s decision is not in accordance with the QWL guidance at paras [102]–[103].”
This passage identifies two material judicial errors. The first error entailed a judicial failure to recognise that the general rule in play viz the need for a deterrent sentence normally entails attributing little weight to personal mitigation factors is not absolute in nature.

8. Second, per para [22]: The COA was influenced by the newly admitted evidence.

[2024] NICA 75

02 February 2024

The King v Fionnghuale Mary Theresa Dympha Marie Nuala Perry

The Court of Appeal sets out best sentencing practice in terrorism cases with reference to the new statutory sentencing regime at paragraphs [33] – [36].

Appeal against a sentence of four years imprisonment and 12 month licence period – collecting or making a record of information likely to be useful to a terrorist – whether sentence manifestly excessive – whether the sentence was a product of an error of law relating to the new sentencing regime – article 7 ECHR – new approach applied by sentencing judge – one year licence period applied by operation of law rather than any judicial decision or act – no error of law – court reemphasised where a deterrent sentence is required personal mitigation carries little weight – appeal dismissed

[2024] NICA 11 McCloskey LJ

12 January 2024

The King v Jacek Pacyno

The Court of Appeal sets out guidance in relation to offences conducted over the internet which involve engaging in sexual activity in the presence of a child or causing or inciting children to engage in sexual activity. The fact that there is no direct physical contact does not alter the seriousness of such offending and the need for condign punishment.

DPP Reference to review a three year probation order – pleas of guilty in respect of a range of sexual offences against children online – whether sentence unduly lenient – delay – Reference allowed – probation order quashed and substituted with 18 months imprisonment.

[2024] NICA 3 Keegan LCJ

10 November 2023

The King v Francis Devlin

Renewed application for leave to appeal a sentence of four years’ imprisonment – four counts of conspiracy to cheat the public revenue – sole issue of impact of imprisonment on applicant’s son – whether sentence should be suspended – Court of Appeal approved the application of the guidance in R v Petherick [2012] EWCA Crim 2214 in NI – circumstances not so exceptional to merit a suspension – public interest in deterrence – appeal dismissed

[2023] NICA 71 Keegan LCJ

19 April 2023

Morgan and others (Respondents) v Ministry of Justice (Appellant) (Northern Ireland)

A judgment of the UKSC on appeal from NI in which it was unanimously held that section 30 of the Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Act 2021, which inserted Article 20A into the Criminal Justice (Northern Ireland) Order 2008, is compatible with article 7 and article 5 of the ECHR.

UKSC 14 [2023]

05 April 2023

King v Sharyar Ali

This judgment serves as a guideline for appropriate sentencing in cases involving the murder of a young child.

DPP reference – whether sentence unduly lenient – murder of an 11 month old child – tariff of 13 years following a “Rooney” indication and after a guilty plea – child subjected to forceful assault – severe trauma to head – rib fractures – multiple blunt blows – whether judge afforded sufficient weight to aggravating factors – whether judge afforded too much weight to mitigating factors – whether reduction for guilty plea was too generous – leave granted – reference allowed – sentence quashed and replaced with a revised tariff of 16 years.

[2023] NICA 20 Keegan LCJ

24 February 2023

King v Qing Wen Lin, Long Quang Lin Lin Zheng, Zhu Lin & Yang Wu Chen

Renewed application for leave to appeal sentence – money laundering operation – Proceeds of Crime Act 2022 – whether sentences manifestly excessive – applications to receive new material granted – principle of mercy applied to two mothers - Article 8 ECHR – the offender’s personal circumstances - judge erred in confining exceptional circumstances to the offending itself - disparity in sentencing – deterrent sentences – culpability – the aggravating factors contained highly prejudicial assertions not agreed or proven – prosecution portrayal of the roles and knowledge attributed to the appellants was inconsistent - roles/rankings which the judge attributed to certain appellants were neither agreed nor proven - leave granted – appeals allowed - sentences reduced.

Guidance in relation to the following sentencing principles can be found at paragraphs [86] – [110] - mercy in sentencing, Article 8 ECHR to include reference to R v Petherick [2013] 1 WLR 1102, exceptional circumstances, the offender’s personal circumstances, disparity in sentencing, deterrent sentences and culpability.

[2023] NICA 11 McCloskey LJ

20 January 2023

King v William Hutchison

This judgment serves as a guide for sentencing in murder cases which involve domestic violence and are characterised by a prior, prolonged history of domestic violence.

This judgment serves as a guide for sentencing in murder cases which involve domestic violence and are characterised by a prior, prolonged history of domestic violence.

Renewed application for leave to appeal a 21 year minimum term imposed in connection with a mandatory life sentence following a late plea to murder – femicide case involving significant domestic violence – whether the judge erred in law when determining the appropriate sentence prior to adjustment for the plea – whether the judge failed to take into account certain factors as mitigation and made insufficient allowance for a guilty plea – court held judge did not fall into error of double counting – the applicant had a history of violence against previous partners – deliberately chose not to summon medical assistance – sentence transparent – no mitigation save for reduction for plea – no basis to interfere with the level of reduction granted – no remorse – leave refused – appeal dismissed.

[2023] NICA 3 Keegan LCJ

05 December 2022

The King v ZB

Guidance provided on sentencing for two equally serious offences on a concurrent basis applying the totality principle - GBH with intent – sexual assault by penetration of a 12 day old baby – sentence of 19 years imprisonment plus an extended period five years - whether manifestly excessive – starting point – dangerousness - culpability and harm high – whether premeditation – no mitigation save for guilty pleas – sentence not manifestly excessive – exceptional circumstances – appellant provided no explanation or offered remorse – appeal dismissed.

[2022] NICA 69 Keegan LCJ

01 December 2022

The King v Laura Adair

Death by careless driving – struck and fatally wounded pedestrian on pedestrian crossing - whether 12-month sentence manifestly excessive - whether trial judge made an error of double counting – court confirmed R v Doole [2010] NICA 11 remains the leading sentencing guideline case in relation to death by careless driving - appeal dismissed.

[2022] NICA 68 McCloskey LJ

25 November 2022

King v Luong Bui

Application for leave to appeal sentence – cultivation of cannabis – abstracting electricity – assisting unlawful immigration – perverting the course of justice – three cannabis factories – strategic control of substantial, sophisticated and highly profitable enterprise – whether sentence for cannabis factory counts too high – whether three year consecutive sentence on top of already stiff sentence manifestly excessive – totality – deterrent sentence of 12 years appropriate – proper global sentence 13 years – sentence perverting the course of justice reduced to 1 year consecutive to other counts – total custodial sentence 13 years - leave granted - appeal allowed.

[2022]NICA 78 Fowler J , Horner LJ , Keegan LCJ

26 October 2022

The King v Filippo Sangermano

actual bodily harm – stabbing with nail scissors – whether sentence manifestly excessive and/or wrong – whether level of culpability unsupported by basis of plea – finding of dangerous – whether VOPO necessary – terms of extended custodial sentence licence – right to a fair trial – burden of proof on prosecution in sentencing process – compilation of pre-sentence reports – duties owed by counsel to sentencing court – emphasis on the importance of the accuracy of the basis of plea document – court adopted the principles in R v Cairns [2013] EWCA Crim 467 - appeal allowed.

[2022] NICA62 Fowler J , McBride J , McCloskey LJ

07 October 2022

King v Shaun Hegarty

guidance in relation to sentencing for rape with aggravating features - appeal against sentence - whether sentence of 20 years plus five years extended term manifestly excessive - rape whilst unconscious – did not disclose previous convictions - grievous bodily harm - attempting to choke - previous rape - no remorse - blamed victim for her injuries – starting point – transparency – methodology of sentence – sentence beyond usual range and may be unprecedented in this jurisdiction – high culpability and high harm with myriad of aggravating factors – appropriate custodial term is one 18 years – no error in 5 year extension period - appeal dismissed.

[2022] NICA 55 Keegan LCJ

23 September 2022

The King v Niall Lehd

Appeal against an extended custodial sentence of 24 years imprisonment with an extension period of 5 years – preparation of acts of terrorism - whether the sentencing judge had erred in principle by basing his approach on the guidelines as stated in R v Kahar [2016] EWCA Crim 568 rather than the SGC Guideline – whether NICA should formulate guidelines for sentencing of offences under section 5(1) of the Terrorism Act 2006 - whether the sentence is manifestly excessive– whether the judge erred in deciding that the appellant is dangerous - sentencing judge was not obliged to apply the SGC Guideline - the judge was entitled to base sentencing on R v Kahar in the absence of NICA guidance - no merit in the challenge to the starting point – no merit in the challenge to the judge’s assessment of mitigating factors – no error in the assessment of dangerousness – held not appropriate for NICA to formulate guidance for section 5(1) cases - sentencing judges at liberty in section 5 cases to consider R v Kahar and the SGC Guideline – appeal dismissed

[2022] NICA 51 McCloskey LJ

01 June 2022

Queen v Christopher Robinson

Appeal against sentence – convicted of murder of a senior prison officer and causing an explosion with intent to endanger life – joint enterprise – mandatory life sentence with 22 year minimum term prior to release at first instance – appeal against minimum tariff of 22 years – application to extend time – whether trial judge was wrong to conclude that there was nothing by way of personal mitigation giving rise to a reduction in sentence - R v McCandless [2004] NICA 1 confirmed as leading authority on sentencing in murder cases – high culpability – high harm – case fell within the very serious category – planned – politically motivated – use of explosive device a highly aggravating factor – terrorist crimes involving serving police or prison officers can expect sentences of upwards of 20 years – personal mitigation is likely to be of limited if any value – no merit in appeal - application to extend time refused - appeal dismissed

[2022] NICA 30 Keegan LCJ

07 March 2022

Queen v Niall Shebani

unlawfully displaying force and making an affray - grievous bodily harm with intent and possession of an offensive weapon – whether starting point too high - 33 previous criminal convictions in Republic of Ireland - medium likelihood of reoffending - knife – whether starting point of nine years is excessive - judge may have incorrectly described it as a starting point - significant aggravating factors - duration of incident limited - sentence not manifestly excessive – appeal dismissed

[2022] NICA 9 McFarland J

07 March 2022

Queen v Christopher Hughes

guidance in relation to sentencing in cases involving multiple incidents of domestic violence - Using motor vehicle without insurance, Assault occasioning actual bodily harm, Common assault, Attempted criminal damage, Possession of an offensive weapon - other convictions and caution for common assault against mother and partner - pending prosecutions in Republic of Ireland - consideration of aggravating and mitigating factors together to reach starting point prior to discount for plea - overall not manifestly excessive - appeal dismissed.

[2022] NICA 12 Keegan LCJ

12 March 2021

R v Luke Walls

DPP reference to the Court of Appeal for unduly lenient sentence – whether sentence unduly lenient – aggravated burglary and stealing, common assault and criminal damage – substantial criminal record - planned criminal enterprise - late pleas of guilty – sentence varied upwards.

[2021] NICA 19 McCloskey LJ

15 January 2021

Queen v Christine Connor

appeal against sentence and DPP’s Reference – terrorist offences – causing explosion and attempted murder – 20-year ECS with 4-year extension period – whether sentence manifestly excessive or unduly lenient – intent - sentencing of the trial judge unsustainably generous – substitution by a sentence of 25 years’ imprisonment accompanied by 4-year extension period - sentence varied upwards.

[2021] NICA 3 McCloskey LJ