A [2019] EWCA Crim 1279

The appellant was 17 years old and his co-accused around a year older. The sentencing judge referred to his age being not far off 18 and not so much younger than his co-accused, equating the appellant’s position with that of his co-accused. On appeal it was submitted that the judge failed to give appropriate weight to his youth and the lack of previous convictions.

Held: the judge fell into error as the co-accused had previous convictions and committed the offences in breach of a conditional discharge, the totality equation would have been different in his case. The Court also concluded that the judge failed to have sufficient regard to the appellant’s youth, relative immaturity and mental health problems. The judge had allowed a reduction of one-sixth in respect of youth and a greater reduction was justified. The appeal was allowed, and the total sentence reduced from 40 months to 32 months.