Hayibor [2019] EWCA Crim 834

The appellant was sentenced to 18 months’ imprisonment for possession of a bladed article having pleaded guilty in the magistrates’ court. The article in question was a machete that he said he had picked up to ward off those who were attacking him. Three males could be seen on CCTV holding what appeared to be shotguns aiming shots at a house. The appellant ran from that house with the machete. A co-accused also inside the house came out with a shotgun. The appellant said that he had left London for Doncaster to get away from a lifestyle centred around an organised crime culture.

The sentencing judge found higher culpability and greater harm as there was a highly dangerous weapon and he was in possession in circumstances where there was a serious risk of disorder, and a risk of serious alarm and distress.
The argument on appeal was that although there was higher culpability the sentence should have reflected the exceptional circumstances in which the appellant left the property in response to gunshot fire.

Held: the judge was entitled, to an extent, to read between the lines that the carrying of the machete out into the street was more than merely a defensive response to an armed attack in the house. The judge was entitled to move up from the starting point of 18 months before reducing the sentence for the guilty plea. The uplift of 9 months, however, was too far. The sentence of 18 months was quashed and substituted with one of 14 months.