Noorzaman Oriakhel [2019] EWCA Crim 1401; [2020] R.T.R. 9, CA.

The appellant was convicted of causing serious injury by dangerous driving and was sentenced to 16 months imprisonment. He appealed against sentence.

The appellant was driving a van and became involved in a verbal dispute with a cyclist, he drove his van toward him, mounting the pavement and hitting a pedestrian. She received serious injuries as a result. The appellant did not admit culpability, blaming cyclists and claiming all the witnesses had lied.

The defence argued that the judge gave insufficient consideration as to whether the sentence could be suspended.

Held: It is correct that the judge did not expressly address himself to the guidelines on the imposition of custodial sentence, but he did, nonetheless, consider immediate custody was appropriate and the issue of suspension was argued before him. Had he addressed the questions in the guidelines he would have needed to consider how they applied to the question of suspension. Having considered the factors notwithstanding the many positive features relating to the appellant the Court concluded that the judge was entitled to impose an immediate custodial sentence. This appeal would not have arisen had he made clear that he was aware of the guideline and addressed himself to the relevant questions therein. The appeal was dismissed.