Court of Appeal Success for Alexandra Monaghan.

Alexandra Monaghan, instructed by Osondu Anodu of Malcolm & Co Solicitors, appeared at the Court of Appeal on behalf of her young client who was previously sentenced to 10 years’ detention in a Young Offenders’ Institution. Alexandra successfully argued that the sentence was manifestly excessive and her client’s sentence was reduced to seven years.

Mr P, aged 18 at the time of the offence, was convicted after trial of robbery and s.20 GBH. He was acquitted of a further robbery following Alexandra’s successful submission of no case to answer, and also acquitted of possession of a bladed article. The offences arose out of the same facts and the robbery was treated as the lead offence for the purposes of sentence.

Mr P was sentenced to 10 years detention for the robbery and no separate penalty for the GBH offence.

At appeal, Alexandra successfully argued that in increasing the sentence by 2 years from the starting point of 8 years, the sentencing judge double counted the GBH injury. Alexandra relied on the principles established in R v Clarke [2018] EWCA Crim 185 and R v Assaf [2019] EWCA Crim 1057 to argue that the sentencing judge had placed insufficient weight on Mr P’s age and good character.

In allowing the appeal on all three grounds, the Court of Appeal held that the sentence had been increased from the starting point without justification and that this amounted to double counting the injury. Further, the Court of Appeal held that no proper reduction had been allowed for Mr P’s age, good character and other mitigation advanced by Alexandra at the sentencing hearing.

After Alexandra’s hard work on behalf of her client, the Court of Appeal reduced the sentence by 3 years – a sentence below even the original starting point.