Court of Appeal quashes sentence allowing for immediate release
Sean represented LF, who appealed a sentence of 27 months for causing GBH, imposed at Inner London Crown Court in August 2025. The appellant had thrown a single punch that broke an off-duty police officer’s jaw in two places. The break was such that the officer’s jaw was wired shut for 10 weeks and resulted in a change to his speech and bite that will to some degree remain permanent.
In the Crown Court
The appellant had pleaded guilty to the lesser of two GBH counts on the indictment on the first day of trial. This was deemed acceptable to the prosecution and both parties agreed that the offending fell into category C2 of the applicable guideline, giving the court a starting point of 1 years’ custody. Having spent over 6 months in custody awaiting trial, defence counsel had invited the court to sentence in a manner that allowed for his immediate release.
The facts
It was common ground that a group of off-duty police officers in drink had acted abhorrently in goading the appellant, a black man wearing a hoody, prior to the punch. Their provocations had clear racial undertones, with the group of white officers having formed the view that the appellant and his friends were either robbers or drug dealers. One of the officers took out his phone and waved it at the appellant, challenging him to try and steal it. The prosecution accepted that their goading of the appellant had instigated the confrontation to follow.
CCTV of the incident and witnesses present confirm that the appellant was acting as peacemaker in the minutes prior to the punch, on more than one occasion beckoning his friends to leave, only to be followed by the officers. As the officers continued to follow, the appellant threw a punch before leaving with his friends. It was delivered from behind and – had the appellant proceeded to trial – it would have been a matter for the jury whether self-defence / defence of another was made out.
In the Court of Appeal
The appeal was heard 7 weeks later. The Court of Appeal agreed with Sean’s submissions that the sentencing judge had erred in three principle way:
- In moving the offending into a higher culpability category in the guideline with a starting point of 2 years on the basis that the appellant had taken a leading role in group activity. The Court of Appeal held that this could not be sustained. The officers were the only party in drink, were the instigators of the animosity, and were responsible for prolonging the encounter. The appellant and his friends were retreating and not acting as a group in any meaningful sense.
- In dismissing as a lesser culpability factor the impulsive/spontaneous and short-lived nature of the assault. The punch was plainly impulsive and spontaneous and any suggestion that the appellant had time to weigh up what he was going to do such that this factor did not apply was unsustainable.
- In dismissing as irrelevant the mitigating factors in this case, which needed to be properly balanced against the appellant’s previous convictions. Not least, the significant degree of provocation preceding the punch which was felt acutely by the appellant given his pre-existing diagnosis of complex PTSD arising from similar incidents involving racist abuse.
Outcome
The Court of Appeal quashed the original sentence of 27 months and substituted it for one of 20 months. The appellant had already served 40% of that sentence awaiting trial and appeal, allowing for his immediate release.
Sean Summerfield was instructed by Rebecca Field of Hodge Jones & Allen.
