Gail Sykes [2019] EWCA Crim 967; [2019] 2 Cr. App. R. (S.) 47

The appellant argued that the minimum sentence for burglary should not be imposed as her relevant convictions were old, from 2000 and 2001. Also, two judges had commented earlier in the proceedings that the minimum sentence may not be appropriate. She was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment following a conviction after trial.

Held: neither of the earlier judges had been asked to give formal advanced indication of sentence and neither actually heard the case. There is no sense in which the appellant acted to her detriment in reliance on anything that was said. This was a question that the eventual trial judge was entitled to come to his own view about. Although the case of McInerney referred to the age of qualifying convictions, in this case the appellant had continued to offend.

She had numerous convictions for dishonesty including non-domestic burglaries in 2005 and 2015 with two offences of attempt burglary dwelling in 2013. There is no doubt that s111 resulted in the appellant receiving a somewhat longer sentence than she would have done but that has to be set against the deterrent purpose of the provision. The appeal was dismissed.