Judges given "essential" guidance on ordering of consecutive sentences (for future HDC purposes)
14/09/2009
In a judgment given last week, the Court of Appeal indicated that sentencing judges must be careful as to the order in which consecutive sentences are passed because of the effect on ‘Home Detention Curfew’ (HDC).
R v Tyler Wolstenholme [2009] (4 September 2009, Rix LJ, Collins J, HHJ Pert Case no. 0904092 A4)
> judgment
Provisions in the CJA 2003 produce almost exactly the same result for early discretionary release for prisoners under the ‘Home Detention Curfew’ scheme as did the relevant provisions of the CJA 1991. However, an anomaly occurs in many cases where there are consecutive sentences of more and less than 12 months and the shorter sentence is ordered to be served last, because the early release provisions of the 2003 Act have not been brought into force for sentences of less than 12 months. The transitional provisions in the; Criminal Justice Act 2003 (Commencement No 8 and Transitional and Saving Provisions) Order 2005, SI 2005/950 (‘the 2005 Order’), as construed in; R (Noone) v Governor of HMP Drake Hall and the Secretary of State for Justice [2009] 1 WLR 1321 more , require the early release provisions to be applied separately to the two elements of the sentence and HDC is thereby often significantly restricted (in the instant case by 105 days).
The Court reversed the order of the sentences and in the judgment (Collins J) indicated that it was “essential” in such cases that sentencers passed the shortest sentence first, followed by the longer term. In some cases such as the instant one this will resolve the anomaly and in others it will reduce it.
This is a widespread problem and it is to be hoped that practitioners will draw it to the attention of sentencing judges.
Pete Weatherby of GCN represented Mr Wolstenholme in the Court of Appeal, instructed by Simon Creighton of Bhatt Murphy Solicitors .
Quick links
> 25/2/08 - Administrative Court ruling on HDC for prisoners - Pete Weatherby also previously appeared in the case of Noone, instructed by the Prisoners Advice Service. The Noone case is awaiting permission to appeal, before the Supreme Court.
> 4/9/09 - Appeal against sentencing affecting HDC upheld (Bhatt Murphy website)
