Sentencing Flashcards
what are the purposes of sentencing?
Purposes of sentencing, Section 57 Sentencing Act 2022:
o Punishment
o Reduction of crime
o Protection to the public
o Rehabilitation
o Reparation
Court must be sure of which of the 5 purposes they aim to achieve when they sentence any adult
what are the purposes of sentencing for those aged below 18?
The purposes of sentencing for anyone aged below 18 is ‘to prevent offending by children and young persons’
The sentence must have regard to the welfare of child or young person
when does the purposes of sentencing not apply?
mandatory life sentences
those aged below 18
hospital orders
what must a court do when sentencing?
Every court—
(a) must, in sentencing an offender, follow any sentencing guidelines which are relevant to the offender’s case, and
(b) must, in exercising any other function relating to the sentencing of offenders, follow any sentencing guidelines which are relevant to the exercise of the function, unless the court is satisfied that it would be contrary to the interests of justice to do so.
Where a court is considering the seriousness of any offence, it must consider—
(a) the offender’s culpability in committing the offence, and
(b) any harm which the offence—
(i) caused,
(ii) was intended to cause, or
(iii) might foreseeably have caused.
The seriousness of the offence is determined by the culpability of the offender and the harm caused by the offending…once a provisional sentence is arrived at the court should take into account factors that may make the offence more serious and factors which may reduce seriousness or reflect personal mitigation
when the defendant has pleaded guilty, the court must consider —
The court must take into account the following matters—
(a) the stage in the proceedings for the offence at which the offender indicated the intention to plead guilty, and
(b) the circumstances in which the indication was given.
what is the custody threshold?
Section 152 Criminal Justice Act 2003 states:
‘The court must not pass a custodial sentence unless it is of the opinion that the offence, or the combination of the offence and one or more offences associated with it, was so serious that neither a fine alone nor a community sentence can be justified for the offence.’
what is the community threshold?
‘A court must not pass a community sentence on an offender unless it is of the opinion that the offence, or the combination of the offence and one or more offences associated with it, was serious enough to warrant such a sentence.’
An acceptance of guilt normally….
Makes it easier for the victims involved in the crime
Saves victims and witnesses from having to testify
It is in the public interest and saves time and money
reductions for guilty plea and mitigation are to be treated how?
separately
where there are separate offences, how should the reduction of sentence be applied?
to each offence.
does the strength of the case affect the level of reductio for a guilty plea?
no
what is the maximum reduction for a guilty plea?
1/3
how much reduction can D receive if they have pleaded guilty after the first hearing or at PTPH?
1/4
how much reduction can D receive if he has pleaded guilty at the first day of trial?
1/10
can a reduction for a guilty plea still be made after the first day of trial?
Yes. Anything between 0 - 1/10
can D enter a guilty plea at the Magistrate’s for an indictable only offence?
a guilty plea cannot be entered, but can be indicated. it has to be an unequivocal indication.
can a delay in entering a guilty pea allow there to be a higher reduction than the time specified. I.E can a defendant still get 1/3 off their sentence at pleading guilty after the first hearing?
Yes. where the court is ‘satisfied that there were particular circumstances which significantly reduced the defendant’s ability to understand what was alleged or otherwise made it unreasonable to expect the defendant to indicate a guilty plea sooner than was done, a reduction of one-third should still be made. In considering whether this exception applies sentencers should distinguish between cases in which it is necessary to receive advice and/or have sight of evidence in order to understand whether the defendant is in fact and law guilty of the offence(s) charged, and cases in which a defendant merely delays guilty plea(s) in order to assess the strength of the prosecution evidence and the prospects of conviction or acquittal.’
what happens to reductions of guilty pleas when there is a Newton Hearing?
‘In circumstances where an offender’s version of events is rejected at a Newton hearing or special reasons hearing, the reduction which would have been available at the stage of proceedings the plea was indicated should normally be halved. Where witnesses are called during such a hearing, it may be appropriate further to decrease the reduction.’
what happens if the defendant has pleaded guilty to a lesser or different offence to the one being charged?
‘if an offender is convicted of a lesser or different offence from that originally charged, and has earlier made an unequivocal indication of a guilty plea to this lesser offence or different offence to the prosecution and the court, the court should give the level of reduction that is appropriate to the stage in the proceedings at which this indication … was made …’.
reduction of guilty pleas for firearms offences
the minimum five-year sentence for certain offences involving firearms that are prohibited weapons under the SA 2020, s. 311. The Court of Appeal decided in Jordan [2004] EWCA Crim 3291, [2005] 2 Cr App R (S) 44 (266), that s. 51A did not permit any reduction below that minimum to reflect a guilty plea
is committing the offence whilst on bail an aggravating factor?
Yes.
Treat this as an aggravating factor
It is particularly acute when the further offence is similar to the offence D was on bail for
Consecutive sentences are still appropriate here
Must be said in open court it is aggravating
Aggravating factors: Previous Convictions
Where D has one or more previous and relevant convictions
Be treated as an aggravating factor
Must be said in open court it is aggravating
Offences which have happened post the offence which D is being sentenced for cannot be taken into consideration as aggravating
Persistent offending is not always the case of aggravating the sentence, other options must be considered. but if all punishment reasons have been exhausted, ie rehab, reparation, then it may as well increase the sentence. Although it cannot be disproportionate
Offences in other EU states can be considered
when considering previous convictions as an aggravating factor, what must the judge consider?
Judge to take into account:
- Relevance to the current offence
- Time that has elapsed
Aggravating Factors: Hostility
This section applies where a court is considering the seriousness of an offence which is aggravated by—
(a) racial hostility,
(b) religious hostility,
(c) hostility related to disability,
(d) hostility related to sexual orientation, or
(e) hostility related to transgender identity.
this does not apply to specific offences which are related to racially or religiously aggravated offences
Aggravating Factors: Terrorist Connections
If the offence has a terrorist connection, the court—
- must treat that fact as an aggravating factor, and
- must state in open court that the offence is so aggravated.
For the purposes of this section, an offence has a terrorist connection if the offence—
- is, or takes place in the course of, an act of terrorism, or
- is committed for the purposes of terrorism.
AND
- was committed on or after the day on which section 1 of the Counter-Terrorism and Sentencing Act 2021 came into force,
- is punishable on indictment with imprisonment for more than 2 years, and
- is not specified in Schedule A1.
general aggravating factors
- Offence committed whilst on bail/license for other offences
- Failure to respond to previous sentences
- Offence was aggravated by hostility towards race, religion, sexual orientation, disability, members of minority groups.
- Previous conviction(s), particularly where a pattern of repeat offending is disclosed
- Planning of an offence
- An intention to commit more serious harm than actually resulted from the offence
- Offenders operating in groups or gangs
- ‘Professional’ offending
- Commission of the offence for financial gain (where this is not inherent in the offence itself)
- High level of profit from the offence
- An attempt to conceal or dispose of evidence
- Failure to respond to warnings or concerns expressed by others about the offender’s behaviour
- Deliberate targeting of vulnerable victim(s)
- Commission of an offence while under the influence of alcohol or drugs
- Use of a weapon to frighten or injure victim
- Deliberate and gratuitous violence or damage to property, over and above what is needed to carry out the offence
- Abuse of power/position of trust
- Multiple victims
- An especially serious physical or psychological effect on the victim, even if unintended
- A sustained assault or repeated assaults on the same victim
- Victim is particularly vulnerable
- Location of the offence (for example, in an isolated place)
- Offence is committed against those working in the public sector or providing a service to the public
- Presence of others eg relatives, especially children or partner of the victim
- Additional degradation of the victim (eg taking photographs of a victim as part of a sexual offence)
- In property offences, high value (including sentimental value) of property to the victim, or substantial consequential loss (eg where the theft of equipment causes serious disruption to a victim’s life or business)
general mitigating factors
- A greater degree of provocation than normally expected
- Mental illness or disability
- Youth or age, where it affects the responsibility of the individual defendant
- The fact that the offender played only a minor role in the offence
- Any personal mitigation
- Good character and/or lack of previous convictions
- remorse
- addictions and D is taking measures to address addiction which is causing offending behaviour.
- sole or primary carer on dependents and relatives
sentencing: Prevalence
Court can treat the prevalence of certain criminal behaviour in a certain area as an aggravating factor.
A court must not increase a sentence due to the prevalence of such an offence unless it has evidence from a local Criminal Justice Board or a ‘Community Impact Statement’
it must be exceptional, just and proportionate to do so.
When passing sentence, the court must:
- Explain to the defendant in non-technical language the sentence that has been passed
- Identify the sentencing guidelines that it followed or why it decided not to follow guidelines that exist
- Explain why the defendant passes the custody threshold if a custodial sentence is passed
- Explain what credit has been given for a guilty plea and why it is at that level
- Set out any particular aggravating and mitigating factors that the court considered in arriving at sentence
deferring a sentence
A court can defer sentence for up to six months, the idea being that the defendant is allowed this time to prove to the court that D has either ‘changed’ or that the offence was an absolute ‘one-off’ and thus allowing D the ability to present to the court at the end of the deferral period in a much better light, and often, receive a lighter sentence as a result.
The deferral period cannot be extended save for where the magistrates’ court defers sentence for a period, at the end of which they commit to the Crown Court for sentence, the Crown Court then has the option of deferring for a further six month period.
maximum sentence for a summary offence in mags
6 months
max sentence for either way in mags
12 months
max aggregate sentence in a mags court
12 months with either-way offences
Pre-Sentence Report
- If someone is aged 18 or over the court must obtain and consider a pre-sentence report unless it considers it to be unnecessary to do so
- If someone is aged below 18 then the court must obtain and consider a pre-sentence report unless there is a previous pre-sentence report of the offender and the court considers that when involving the circumstances of the case and considering the most recent presentence report that it is unnecessary to obtain a PSR
- Where the curt did not obtain and consider a PSR, no custodial or community based sentence is invalidated on that basis solely
Victim Personal Statement
- Where victims can put together the impact the criminal; actions have had on their life in order for the sentencer to reflect this when passing down their sentence. It is not there to suggest the sentence
- To show the level of harm suffered
o Defence should be allowed to see the VPS and respond to it
o They help for many psychological harms the victim is suffering an no need for expert reports
Mentally Disordered Offenders: Medical report
- The more recent and serious the offence, the more likely the court is to get a report
- Where there are mentally disordered offenders, the court cannot pass a custodial sentence unless they have obtained a medial report. Only where the d=sentence is fixed are they allowed to not obtain a report
- Medical report to be tendered as evidence
- Copy to be given to counsel
- Unrepped persons should have the contents read out by p[aren’t or guardian or by medial expert
- They may be cross-examined
- For a hospital order to custodial sentence a report written and signed by two medical practitioners is required
Judicial Indications on Sentence and The Goodyear approach
Judicial indications of sentence
o Where offenders have had not genuine choice of plea and they enter a plea of guilty, the conviction may be quashed as it is nullified
o Plea must be voluntary
The Goodyear Approach:
o Correct procedure for judicial indications of sentence is set out in Goodyear
o They may give the maximum sentence possible had the defendant enter a guilty plea
who should seek a Goodyear direction?
the principal feature of an appropriate indication of sentence is that an advance indication should be sought by the defence, and not promulgated by the judge
what should the Goodyear approach not do regarding the consideration of trial
an indication should not be given that a trial would result in a much longer sentence compared to the one offered if the accused pleads guilty.
The Goodyear direction: Responsibilities of the Court
(1)A court should not give an indication of sentence unless one has been sought by the accused.
(2)However, the court remains entitled to exercise the power to indicate that the sentence, or type of sentence, on the accused would be the same whether the case proceeds as a plea of guilty or goes to trial, with a resulting conviction. Where the sentence will vary according to plea, the court should only give an indication as to the sentence following a guilty plea.
(3)Where an indication is sought, the court may refuse altogether to give an indication, or may postpone doing so, with or without giving reasons.
(4)Where the court has it in mind to defer an indication, the probability is that the judge would explain the reasons, and further indicate the circumstances in which, and when, he or she would be prepared to respond to a request for a sentence indication.
(5)If the court refuses to give an indication (as opposed to deferring it), it remains open to the defence to make a further request for an indication at a later stage.
(6)Once an indication has been given, it is binding and remains binding on the judge who has given it, and it also binds any other judge who becomes responsible for the case.
(7)If, after a reasonable opportunity to consider his or her position in the light of the indication, the accused does not plead guilty, the indication will cease to have effect.
(8)Where appropriate, there must be an agreed, written basis of plea, otherwise the judge should refuse to give an indication.
The Goodyear Direction: Responsibilities of the Defence
(1)Subject to the court’s power to give an appropriate reminder to the advocate for the accused, the process of seeking a sentence indication should normally be started by the defence.
(2)Whether or not such a reminder has been given, the accused’s advocate should not seek an indication without signed written authority that the client wishes to seek an indication.
(3)The advocate is personally responsible for ensuring that the client fully appreciates that (a) he or she should not plead guilty unless he or she is guilty, (b) any sentence indication given by the court remains subject to the entitlement of the A-G to refer an unduly lenient sentence to the Court of Appeal, (c) any indication given by the court reflects the situation at the time when it is given and if a guilty plea is not tendered in the light of that indication, the indication ceases to have effect, and (d) any indication which may be given relates only to the matters about which an indication is sought.
(4)An indication should not be sought while there is any uncertainty between the prosecution and the defence about an acceptable plea or pleas to the indictment, or the factual basis relating to any plea.
(5)Any agreed basis should be reduced into writing before an indication is sought.
(6)Where there is a dispute about a particular fact which counsel for the accused believes to be effectively immaterial to the sentencing decision, the difference should be recorded for the court to consider.
(7)The court should never be invited to indicate levels of sentence which depend on possible different pleas.
(8)In the unusual event that the accused is unrepresented, the accused would be entitled to seek a sentence indication of his or her own initiative, but it would be wrong for either the court or prosecuting counsel to take any initiative in this regard that might too readily be interpreted as or subsequently argued to have been improper pressure.
The Goodyear Direction: Responsibilities of the Prosecution
(1)As the request for indication comes from the defence, the prosecution are obliged to react to, rather than initiate the process.
(2)If there is no final agreement about the plea to the indictment, or the basis of plea, and the defence nevertheless proceed to seek an indication, which the court appears minded to give, prosecuting counsel should remind the court that an indication of sentence should normally not be given until the basis of the plea has been agreed, or the judge has concluded that the case can be properly dealt with without the need for a Newton hearing.
(3)If an indication is sought, the prosecution should normally inquire whether the court is in possession of or has had access to all the evidence relied on by the prosecution, including any personal impact statement from the victim of the crime, as well as any information of relevant previous convictions recorded against the accused.
(4)If the process has been properly followed, it should not normally be necessary for counsel for the prosecution, before the court gives any indication, to do more than (a) draw the judge’s attention to any minimum or mandatory statutory sentencing requirements, and, where applicable or where invited to do so, to any definitive sentencing guidelines of the Sentencing Council or any relevant guideline cases, and (b) where it applies, to remind the judge that the entitlement of the A-G to refer any eventual sentencing decision as unduly lenient is not affected.
(5)In any event, counsel should not say anything which may create the impression that the sentence indication has the support or approval of the Crown.
The Goodyear Direction: Indication process
(1)It is anticipated that any sentence indication would normally be sought at the plea and case management hearing, following a written application.
(2) a hearing involving an indication of sentence should normally take place in open court with a full recording of the entire proceedings, and both sides represented, in the presence of the accused.
(3)The court is most unlikely to be able to give an indication in complicated or difficult cases unless issues between the prosecution and the defence have been addressed and resolved. Therefore, in such cases, no less than seven days’ notice of an intention to seek an indication should normally be given in writing to the prosecution and the court.
(4)If an application is made without notice when it should have been given, the court may conclude that any inevitable adjournment should have been avoided and that the discount for the guilty plea should be reduced accordingly.
(5)There should be very little need for the court to be involved in the discussions with the advocates, save to seek better information on any troubling aspect of the case. An opening by the Crown, or a mitigation plea by the defence, is not envisaged.
(6)The fact that notice has been given, and any reference to a request for a sentence indication, or the circumstances in which it was sought, would be inadmissible in any subsequent trial.
(7)Reporting restrictions should normally be imposed, to be lifted if and when the accused pleads or is found guilty.
Any Goodyear Indication which has been given lapses if…
…the accused does not then plead guilty and cannot later bind the court.
If the accused does not accept he indication in a reasonable time, they cannot complain if the judge subsequently disregards it
Sentencing: Counsels duty to help the court
Counsel need to be aware of the all limitation of the courts’ sentencing powers
Sentencing: Ascertaining the facts of the offence
o Prosecuting counsel are to summarise the facts of the case to the judge
o If co-defendants, the one who pleads guilty will wait until the conclusion of the trial of the one who pleads NG
Duties of prosecutor in relation to sentencing
It is duty of all counsel to ensure the sentencing is conducted fairly, although he following points relate to the persecuting counsel:
- Only provide evidence of the offence for which the defendant has pleaded or been found guilty for
- Counsel is required to address any ancillary order which is being proposed alongside any other sentence
- Prosecutor is under a duty that the court does not make an appealable error
- Prosecutor can prepare a ‘plea and sentence document’
Sentencing: Factual basis
A lot of the time there is no dispute but where the factual differences are there, the defence can have a written basis of plea which counsel agree to.
Sentencing: Disputes of fact following guilty plea - duty of Defence
Duty is on there defence to raise the issue:
* Where D pleads guilty on a limited basis, defence are to set out the basis on which D pleads
* It has to be in writing, unequivocal and unambiguous otherwise a judge is entitled to ignore it
* Court should ideally be notified in advance or at the mitigation hearing
what three ways can a court use to deal with disputes of fact regarding sentencing?
- Have a trial where a jury is to decide, such as deciding between s 20 and 18
- The judge is to decide after hearing evidence
- Judge is to decide after hearing submissions from counsel, though this is where there is a presumption that the defences version of events are correct, it is for the prosecution to prove otherwise
Sentencing: Disputes of fact following guilty plea - duty of Prosecution
Duty on prosecution:
* Alert the court to potentially resolve any factual issues
Sentencing: Disputes of fact following guilty plea - duty on court to resolve issues
Duty on court to resolve issues:
* Judge is entitled to require e newton hearing to decide the factual matters
* It has to be necessary for the basis of the sentence
Where the impact of the dispute on the eventual sentencing decision is minimal…
…a Newton hearing is unnecessary—the judge will rarely be concerned with minute differences about events on the periphery.
The court is entitled to decline to hear evidence at a Newton hearing where D’s version of events is absurd or clearly unreliable but…
…the judge should explain why that conclusion has been reached.
A written basis of plea should not take the prosecution by surprise, and they should if necessary…
…take time to reflect, consult and consider their position and the interests of justice. Any view formed by the prosecution on a proposed basis of plea is deemed to be conditional on the judge’s acceptance of it.
For Sentencing, the prosecution may agree D’s account of the disputed facts. If so…
…the agreement should be reduced to writing and signed by both advocates, which should be available to the judge in advance of the sentencing hearing and before the court is asked to approve the acceptance of plea. If the agreed basis of plea is not signed by advocates for both sides, or it is not legible, the judge is entitled to ignore it.
If the prosecution rejects D’s version, the areas of dispute…
…should be identified in a document that focuses the attention of the court on the precise facts which are in dispute.
What if the prosecution lack the evidence positively to dispute D’s account when art comes to the factual basis of plea?
(a)In many cases, for example, the matter in issue is outside the knowledge of the prosecution. The prosecution’s position may be that they have no evidence to contradict the defence assertions, but that does not mean that the truth of matters outside their own knowledge should be agreed.
(b)Neither the prosecution nor the judge is bound to agree facts merely because the prosecution cannot gainsay D’s account (a situation sometimes referred to as a ‘reverse Newton’). In those circumstances, particularly if the facts relied upon by D arise from personal knowledge and depend on D’s own account of the facts, the prosecution should only positively agree that account if it is supported by other material.
(c)Where the issue arises from facts that are within D’s exclusive knowledge, the defence should be willing to call their client. An adjournment for these purposes is often unnecessary, since D will be present at the hearing. If D does not give evidence, the judge may draw appropriate inferences, subject to any explanation put forward.
(d)Note that where D relies on extraneous mitigation there is usually, in practice, considerable deference to the submissions of counsel but the position in principle is that there is a burden on the defence to establish relevant facts to the civil standard (Guppy [1994] Crim LR 614).
where the basis of plea is agreed between the parties, is the judge bound?
No.
The judge is not bound by any such agreement, and is entitled to insist that any evidence relevant to the facts in dispute should be called. In such a case the judge is entitled to expect the assistance of prosecuting counsel in presenting evidence, and in testing any evidence called by the defence. The agreement which the prosecution have previously entered into with the defence must be viewed as conditional on the approval of the judge. If the judge’s approval is not forthcoming, the defence cannot seek to hold the prosecution to the agreement. However, before embarking on the trial of an issue, the judge might consider whether, in fairness to D, there is any part of the agreement by which the prosecution should be bound.
If the judge decides to hold a Newton hearing, it is important to…
… avoid giving the impression that the judge has already concluded that the defence version is implausible
limitations to a Newton hearing
(a)some issues require a verdict from a jury, e.g., intent;
(b)a judge cannot make findings of fact and then sentence on a basis that is inconsistent with the pleas to the counts on the indictment;
(c)where a number of persons are charged with a joint enterprise, the seriousness and context are always relevant;
(d)matters of mitigation are not normally dealt with in a Newton hearing, but where there is no evidence to support D’s account other than D’s own assertions, the judge is entitled to invite defence counsel to call their client.
At the Newton hearing itself, the judge should self-direct…
…just as a jury would have been directed, on the burden and standard of proof in accordance with ordinary principles.
effect of credit for a Newton hearing
If issues on a Newton hearing are resolved in D’s favour, the credit due for a guilty plea should not be reduced. However, if D is disbelieved (especially if the prosecution has been obliged to call evidence from a witness causing unnecessary and inappropriate distress), and the judge concludes that D has no insight into the consequences of the offence and no genuine remorse for it, the discount for a guilty plea may be significantly reduced, particularly if it has been tendered at a very late stage. There might be an exceptional case in which the normal entitlement to credit for a guilty plea is wholly dissipated by the Newton hearing, in which case the judge should explain the reasons.
Newton hearing: Defence version is absurd
- It may be the case that the defence version is just so implausible that the defence version is not wanted nor necessary
- Judge is entitled to reject the submission put forth
Newton hearing: Burden and standard of Proof
Burden is on prosecution to prove beyond reasonable doubt that the version of events are true