Khalid Mokadeh [2019] EWCA Crim 1242

**SKIP:** The judgment is complete and suitable for a case note, but I notice the annex is referenced but not included in the provided text. However, the main judgment contains sufficient detail to proceed with a full note.

Regina v Khalid Mokadeh [2019] EWCA Crim 1242 concerned an application for leave to appeal sentence which the Court of Appeal refused after the Single Judge had already declined permission.

Mr Mokadeh, aged 23 at sentence, pleaded guilty to multiple offences and was convicted of manslaughter by reason of loss of control following trial. On 22 August 2018 at the Crown Court at Sheffield he received an extended sentence of 30 years, comprising a custodial term of 27 years and an extended licence period of three years, for manslaughter, with concurrent sentences for wounding with intent contrary to section 18 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 (seven and a half years and three and a half years on separate indictments) and possession of bladed articles contrary to section 139(1) of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 (two years on multiple counts).

The offending spanned several months in 2017 on the Wensley Estate in Sheffield, an area where different nationalities mixed and cooperation with police was minimal. On 24 May 2017 Mr Mokadeh, whilst drinking Jack Daniels and arguing with another man, thrust a knife into Mohammed Al-Saroori’s chest after Mr Al-Saroori intervened. The injury to the small bowel required emergency surgery. Mr Al-Saroori initially refused to make a complaint, but his mother visited Mr Mokadeh’s family in accordance with custom and a mediator secured a written apology from the applicant. On 15 June 2017 Mr Mokadeh was shot in the leg on the same estate, and he claimed to believe that Sami Al-Saroori, Mohammed’s brother, had ordered the shooting. He was subsequently no longer welcome at his family home and began sleeping rough. On 6 September 2017 Mr Mokadeh confronted Fathi Dahir on the estate, complaining about “snitches”, and lunged at him three times with a folding knife, inflicting a stab wound to the buttock penetrating about one centimetre into subcutaneous tissue. On 9 September 2017 Mr Mokadeh attended drinks at the home of Daniel Briggs, where he became increasingly intoxicated. Shortly before midnight Sami Al-Saroori entered the property and, as he came out, a witness saw Mr Mokadeh move towards Mr Al-Saroori’s chest. Sami Al-Saroori ran but was chased by Mr Mokadeh, who was carrying a knife. Sami Al-Saroori died the next day from a single stab wound to the chest which had penetrated the thick bone of the sternum with severe force. Mr Mokadeh surrendered to police on 10 September 2017 and in his third interview claimed he had feared he would be killed when grabbed by Sami Al-Saroori and had stabbed him without intending to kill. He denied the earlier incidents.

The sentencing judge found that the attack on Mohammed Al-Saroori had been remorseless and committed by a man spoiling for violence whilst drunk, with clear intention to cause at least really serious harm. The attack on Mr Dahir was another unprovoked and gratuitous knife attack. As to the manslaughter, the judge sentenced on the basis that Mr Mokadeh had feared further violence from Sami Al-Saroori, consistent with the jury’s rejection of self-defence but acceptance that he might have lost self-control. The judge noted that knife crime had reached epidemic proportions and these events required condign punishment. He found Mr Mokadeh dangerous, noting that knives had been used to attack three people on three occasions over a relatively brief period. The judge considered the Sentencing Guidelines for manslaughter and observed that in murder cases the minimum term was 25 years when a knife was taken to the scene. He found that the trigger event only just cleared the threshold for the statutory partial defence and that the shooting incident had caused a degree of post-traumatic stress and hyper-awareness. Aggravating features included intoxication, the fact the offence occurred at night in a public place in a residential cul-de-sac, and that Mr Mokadeh left the scene and disposed of the weapon. For manslaughter the term would have been 16 years’ imprisonment. The wounding of Mohammed Al-Saroori fell into Category 1 of the relevant guideline and would have attracted 12 years, reduced to seven and a half years with minimal credit of six months for the late guilty plea. The offence against Mr Dahir was in Category 2 and would have attracted five and a half years, reduced to three and a half years. Had these been consecutive the overall custodial term would have been 27 years. The judge concluded that a discretionary life sentence was unnecessary and the public could be adequately protected by an extended sentence. A single sentence for manslaughter would reflect the whole of the criminality, so the other sentences would run concurrently. No credit was given for the offer of guilty pleas during the murder trial because Mr Mokadeh had sought from first to last to exculpate himself and expressed little or no remorse.

The grounds of appeal contended that the judge made errors of fact in his sentencing remarks, that his starting point was too high, that he paid insufficient regard to aggravating and mitigating features, that he erred in his assessment of dangerousness, that he gave no credit for the offer of guilty pleas during the murder trial, and that he effectively made sentences consecutive in a manner offending the principle of totality.

The Court of Appeal rejected each ground. Lady Justice Rafferty, delivering the judgment of the court, agreed with the reasoning set out in the Crown’s grounds of opposition. The Crown had submitted that the judge’s findings were entirely justified, he adopted the correct approach to sentencing for manslaughter and had appropriate regard to aggravating and mitigating features, the 16-year starting point after trial was unimpeachable, a finding of dangerousness was inevitable, the judge had been entitled and right to withhold credit for plea, and he had properly applied the principle of totality so that the sentence, albeit condign, was not manifestly excessive. The Single Judge had refused leave on the basis that there was no merit in any of the grounds for the reasons set out in the respondent’s notice. The Court of Appeal agreed with that assessment and refused the renewed application. The court considered but declined to make a loss of time order despite the Single Judge having indicated that one should be considered if the application was unsuccessful. Mr Worsley had appeared on behalf of the applicant via video-link.

In short, the Court of Appeal found the extended sentence of 30 years for manslaughter and concurrent terms for multiple knife attacks to be entirely justified and refused leave to appeal.