Rated criminal defence solicitor who will defend your charge of causing grievous bodily harm (“GBH”)

If you face a charge of wounding or causing grievous bodily harm (“GBH”), and you can pay privately, then you will want to instruct a rated criminal defence solicitor, like Jim Meyer, to represent you.

Charges of wounding or inflicting GBH, including the racially or religiously aggravated form, are triable either way, and so the case can be heard in the magistrates’ court or crown court. Wounding or causing GBH with intent, however, is far more serious and such cases can only be heard on indictment, in the crown court.

If you are convicted of inflicting GBH or unlawful wounding contrary to section 20 of the Offences against the Person Act 1861 then, unless you are found to have lower culpability and caused lesser harm in the context of the offence itself, the starting point under the applicable sentencing guidelines is imprisonment.

A charge of causing grievous bodily harm with intent or wounding with intent, contrary to section 18 of the same Act risks a lengthy prison sentence under the guidelines, regardless of culpability or harm categorisation.

Are you looking for a solicitor to help you defend an allegation of GBH?

If you are accused of GBH and looking for a solicitor to you defend you then Jim Meyer can assist. He has represented numerous clients in a similar position:

  • Jim has helped some of them avoid being charged at all;
  • Other clients have been acquitted after trial;
  • Even when clients have admitted to unlawful wounding, Jim has persuaded the sentencing court that they had lower culpability and / or caused less harm than argued by the prosecution, securing a more lenient punishment and in numerous cases helping his clients avoid an immediate custodial sentence.

Jim has acted for clients who have been mistakenly identified as an attacker, or who have acted in self-defence or the defence of another. Some have been falsely accused on the basis of a complainant’s or witness’s malicious lies. Does that sound familiar and correlate to the facts of your case?

Unfortunately, victims can and do erroneously identify their attacker; honest witnesses can be mistaken but nevertheless their evidence can be compelling. Witnesses lie for all sorts of reasons, including a motivation to seek material gain or cover up their own or another’s behaviour; they may seek revenge, or attention and / or sympathy.

In all cases, to provide the best prospects of success, what is required, and what Jim delivers, is a proactive, systematic investigation of the case. Jim’s proven ability to engage in active defence, to respond appropriately at each significant milestone, rests fundamentally on his ability to investigate exhaustively and effectively, managing and responding to information in a continuous cycle of decision-making and action.

Jim gains access to information through methodical planning and action; this gives him a detailed understanding of the facts, particularly features and characteristics about such information which, under other circumstances, would be far from obvious. It is Jim’s tenacity that his clients value and are willing to pay for.

If you hire Jim Meyer as your lawyer, you aren’t just buying his time; you’ll benefit from his obsessive compulsion to dig into the detail of your case and to exhaust all lines of inquiry in an effort to secure you the best result.

How much will it cost?

If you instruct Jim, probably the first thing you will realise is that he is a straight-talking lawyer who provides honest and frank advice without any "BS". The same is also true about what he will tell you in relation to how much it will likely cost you to hire him, and he aims to be completely transparent about what he charges, what this pays for and how this compares to a lawyer being remunerated under legal aid. Jim believes this is the only way his clients can make a sensible, informed decision on how to proceed.

Jim has compiled a database of historical bills for matters in a single financial year to help him estimate how much a case will cost. Looking at this data there are 1,099 cases1 where:

  1. The main allegation was wounding or grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm etc.,
  2. There was a single defendant, who
  3. Pleaded not guilty, and
  4. Was subseqently tried before a jury in the Crown Court.

Based on this information, Jim's advice is:

  • The prosecution evidence in a typical case alleging wounding or grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm etc. normally runs to approximately 301 pages (note that this does not include CCTV, multi-media or digital evidence; nor does it include any unused material served by the prosecution [i.e. material which the prosecution believes may undermine its case or assist the case for the accused] or any evidence collected by the defence); the minimum number of pages was recorded as 12 and the maximum was 23,615;
  • A crown court trial where there is a single defendant and the main allegation is wounding or grievous bodily harm with intent to cause grievous bodily harm etc. will normally comprise 21 prosecution witnesses and last around 5 days (the lowest number of witnesses recorded was 2 and the most was 242; the shortest trial recorded was 1 and the longest was 53);
  • For a trial lasting 5 days with 21 witnesses and a similar page count of 301 pages, Jim estimates the total cost (including VAT and the advocates fee but excluding any other disbursements) will be in the range of £50,100 to £77,940. This compares to the typical fee2 of £7,800 paid to the legal team under legal aid.

Graduated table of estimated legal costs for wounding and GBH with intent cases, including VAT and the advocate' fee but exluding all other disbursements
Pages of Material Days in Court
1 day 2 days 3 days 4 days 5 days 6 days 7 days 8 days 9 days 10 days 11 days 12 days 13 days 14 days 15 days 16 days 17 days 18 days 19 days 20 days
1-50 £8,880-£13,620 £15,360-£24,300 £21,840-£34,980 £28,320-£45,660 £34,800-£56,340 £41,280-£67,020 £47,760-£77,700 £54,240-£88,380 £60,720-£99,060 £67,200-£109,740 £73,680-£120,420 £80,160-£131,100 £86,640-£141,780 £93,120-£152,460 £99,600-£163,140 £106,080-£173,820 £112,560-£184,500 £119,040-£195,180 £125,520-£205,860 £132,000-£216,540
51-100 £11,420-£17,220 £17,900-£27,900 £24,380-£38,580 £30,860-£49,260 £37,340-£59,940 £43,820-£70,620 £50,300-£81,300 £56,780-£91,980 £63,260-£102,660 £69,740-£113,340 £76,220-£124,020 £82,700-£134,700 £89,180-£145,380 £95,660-£156,060 £102,140-£166,740 £108,620-£177,420 £115,100-£188,100 £121,580-£198,780 £128,060-£209,460 £134,540-£220,140
101-150 £13,980-£20,820 £20,460-£31,500 £26,940-£42,180 £33,420-£52,860 £39,900-£63,540 £46,380-£74,220 £52,860-£84,900 £59,340-£95,580 £65,820-£106,260 £72,300-£116,940 £78,780-£127,620 £85,260-£138,300 £91,740-£148,980 £98,220-£159,660 £104,700-£170,340 £111,180-£181,020 £117,660-£191,700 £124,140-£202,380 £130,620-£213,060 £137,100-£223,740
151-200 £16,520-£24,420 £23,000-£35,100 £29,480-£45,780 £35,960-£56,460 £42,440-£67,140 £48,920-£77,820 £55,400-£88,500 £61,880-£99,180 £68,360-£109,860 £74,840-£120,540 £81,320-£131,220 £87,800-£141,900 £94,280-£152,580 £100,760-£163,260 £107,240-£173,940 £113,720-£184,620 £120,200-£195,300 £126,680-£205,980 £133,160-£216,660 £139,640-£227,340
201-250 £19,080-£28,020 £25,560-£38,700 £32,040-£49,380 £38,520-£60,060 £45,000-£70,740 £51,480-£81,420 £57,960-£92,100 £64,440-£102,780 £70,920-£113,460 £77,400-£124,140 £83,880-£134,820 £90,360-£145,500 £96,840-£156,180 £103,320-£166,860 £109,800-£177,540 £116,280-£188,220 £122,760-£198,900 £129,240-£209,580 £135,720-£220,260 £142,200-£230,940
251-300 £21,620-£31,620 £28,100-£42,300 £34,580-£52,980 £41,060-£63,660 £47,540-£74,340 £54,020-£85,020 £60,500-£95,700 £66,980-£106,380 £73,460-£117,060 £79,940-£127,740 £86,420-£138,420 £92,900-£149,100 £99,380-£159,780 £105,860-£170,460 £112,340-£181,140 £118,820-£191,820 £125,300-£202,500 £131,780-£213,180 £138,260-£223,860 £144,740-£234,540
301-350 £24,180-£35,220 £30,660-£45,900 £37,140-£56,580 £43,620-£67,260 £50,100-£77,940 £56,580-£88,620 £63,060-£99,300 £69,540-£109,980 £76,020-£120,660 £82,500-£131,340 £88,980-£142,020 £95,460-£152,700 £101,940-£163,380 £108,420-£174,060 £114,900-£184,740 £121,380-£195,420 £127,860-£206,100 £134,340-£216,780 £140,820-£227,460 £147,300-£238,140
351-400 £26,720-£38,820 £33,200-£49,500 £39,680-£60,180 £46,160-£70,860 £52,640-£81,540 £59,120-£92,220 £65,600-£102,900 £72,080-£113,580 £78,560-£124,260 £85,040-£134,940 £91,520-£145,620 £98,000-£156,300 £104,480-£166,980 £110,960-£177,660 £117,440-£188,340 £123,920-£199,020 £130,400-£209,700 £136,880-£220,380 £143,360-£231,060 £149,840-£241,740
401-450 £29,280-£42,420 £35,760-£53,100 £42,240-£63,780 £48,720-£74,460 £55,200-£85,140 £61,680-£95,820 £68,160-£106,500 £74,640-£117,180 £81,120-£127,860 £87,600-£138,540 £94,080-£149,220 £100,560-£159,900 £107,040-£170,580 £113,520-£181,260 £120,000-£191,940 £126,480-£202,620 £132,960-£213,300 £139,440-£223,980 £145,920-£234,660 £152,400-£245,340
451-500 £31,820-£46,020 £38,300-£56,700 £44,780-£67,380 £51,260-£78,060 £57,740-£88,740 £64,220-£99,420 £70,700-£110,100 £77,180-£120,780 £83,660-£131,460 £90,140-£142,140 £96,620-£152,820 £103,100-£163,500 £109,580-£174,180 £116,060-£184,860 £122,540-£195,540 £129,020-£206,220 £135,500-£216,900 £141,980-£227,580 £148,460-£238,260 £154,940-£248,940
501-1,000 £45,860-£65,820 £52,340-£76,500 £58,820-£87,180 £65,300-£97,860 £71,780-£108,540 £73,580-£114,540 £75,380-£120,540 £77,180-£126,540 £78,980-£132,540 £80,780-£138,540 £82,580-£144,540 £84,380-£150,540 £86,180-£156,540 £87,980-£162,540 £89,780-£168,540 £91,580-£174,540 £93,380-£180,540 £95,180-£186,540 £96,980-£192,540 £98,780-£198,540
1,001-1,500 £71,360-£101,820 £77,840-£112,500 £84,320-£123,180 £90,800-£133,860 £97,280-£144,540 £99,080-£150,540 £100,880-£156,540 £102,680-£162,540 £104,480-£168,540 £106,280-£174,540 £108,080-£180,540 £109,880-£186,540 £111,680-£192,540 £113,480-£198,540 £115,280-£204,540 £117,080-£210,540 £118,880-£216,540 £120,680-£222,540 £122,480-£228,540 £124,280-£234,540
1,501-2,000 £96,860-£137,820 £103,340-£148,500 £109,820-£159,180 £116,300-£169,860 £122,780-£180,540 £124,580-£186,540 £126,380-£192,540 £128,180-£198,540 £129,980-£204,540 £131,780-£210,540 £133,580-£216,540 £135,380-£222,540 £137,180-£228,540 £138,980-£234,540 £140,780-£240,540 £142,580-£246,540 £144,380-£252,540 £146,180-£258,540 £147,980-£264,540 £149,780-£270,540
2,001-2,500 £122,360-£173,820 £128,840-£184,500 £135,320-£195,180 £141,800-£205,860 £148,280-£216,540 £150,080-£222,540 £151,880-£228,540 £153,680-£234,540 £155,480-£240,540 £157,280-£246,540 £159,080-£252,540 £160,880-£258,540 £162,680-£264,540 £164,480-£270,540 £166,280-£276,540 £168,080-£282,540 £169,880-£288,540 £171,680-£294,540 £173,480-£300,540 £175,280-£306,540
2,501-3,000 £147,860-£209,820 £154,340-£220,500 £160,820-£231,180 £167,300-£241,860 £173,780-£252,540 £175,580-£258,540 £177,380-£264,540 £179,180-£270,540 £180,980-£276,540 £182,780-£282,540 £184,580-£288,540 £186,380-£294,540 £188,180-£300,540 £189,980-£306,540 £191,780-£312,540 £193,580-£318,540 £195,380-£324,540 £197,180-£330,540 £198,980-£336,540 £200,780-£342,540
3,001-3,500 £173,360-£245,820 £179,840-£256,500 £186,320-£267,180 £192,800-£277,860 £199,280-£288,540 £201,080-£294,540 £202,880-£300,540 £204,680-£306,540 £206,480-£312,540 £208,280-£318,540 £210,080-£324,540 £211,880-£330,540 £213,680-£336,540 £215,480-£342,540 £217,280-£348,540 £219,080-£354,540 £220,880-£360,540 £222,680-£366,540 £224,480-£372,540 £226,280-£378,540
3,501-4,000 £198,860-£281,820 £205,340-£292,500 £211,820-£303,180 £218,300-£313,860 £224,780-£324,540 £226,580-£330,540 £228,380-£336,540 £230,180-£342,540 £231,980-£348,540 £233,780-£354,540 £235,580-£360,540 £237,380-£366,540 £239,180-£372,540 £240,980-£378,540 £242,780-£384,540 £244,580-£390,540 £246,380-£396,540 £248,180-£402,540 £249,980-£408,540 £251,780-£414,540
4,001-4,500 £224,360-£317,820 £230,840-£328,500 £237,320-£339,180 £243,800-£349,860 £250,280-£360,540 £252,080-£366,540 £253,880-£372,540 £255,680-£378,540 £257,480-£384,540 £259,280-£390,540 £261,080-£396,540 £262,880-£402,540 £264,680-£408,540 £266,480-£414,540 £268,280-£420,540 £270,080-£426,540 £271,880-£432,540 £273,680-£438,540 £275,480-£444,540 £277,280-£450,540
4,501-5,000 £249,860-£353,820 £256,340-£364,500 £262,820-£375,180 £269,300-£385,860 £275,780-£396,540 £277,580-£402,540 £279,380-£408,540 £281,180-£414,540 £282,980-£420,540 £284,780-£426,540 £286,580-£432,540 £288,380-£438,540 £290,180-£444,540 £291,980-£450,540 £293,780-£456,540 £295,580-£462,540 £297,380-£468,540 £299,180-£474,540 £300,980-£480,540 £302,780-£486,540

1 Note that this doesn't represent all of the data on historical cases; in order to try to provide a "like-for-like" comparison it is restricted to cases where there was a single client and the matter was tried in the crown court. This will give you a general idea but obviously Jim will be able to advise you on the specifics of your particular case and the impact this may have on the likely cost.

2 This is an approximation. There are calculators available on the MOJ\'s website which will help you work out the fee claimable under the scheme, exluding any additional payment made for "special preparation".

Relevant case law in relation to wounding and assault occasioning grievous bodily harm

[2019] EWCA Crim 2202
[2019] EWCA Crim 2202
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Burnett LCJ, Sweeney J, Sir Roderick Evans)
11 December 2019

Concurrent sentences of 40 months' imprisonment imposed following guilty pleas to three counts of grievous bodily harm with intent was not manifestly excessive where the injuries were in the form of body modification procedures carried out with the victims' consent. Although such consent could not provide a defence, it did place the offences in the "lower culpability" category for sentencing purposes, notwithstanding the use of a knife.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1772
[2019] EWCA Crim 1772
CA (Crim Div) (Nicola Davies LJ, Spencer J, Edis J)
24 September 2019

An application for permission to appeal against a 13-year extended sentence imposed following a conviction for wounding with intent, where the judge had made a finding of dangerousness without the benefit of a pre-sentence report, was refused. Although such a finding without a pre-sentence report required careful justification, the trial judge had been able to form an impression of the offender and had a proper basis for making the finding.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1143
[2019] EWCA Crim 1143
CA (Crim Div) (Leggatt LJ, Nicol J, Butcher J)
4 July 2019

A judge had not erred in admitting as hearsay evidence under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.114(1)(d) evidence from a person who had been at the scene of an offence of wounding with intent but could not subsequently be identified. The unidentified person, a passenger on a bus travelling past the incident, had recorded the registration number of the assailant's car on her mobile telephone, which was reported to the police by a fellow passenger.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1094
[2019] EWCA Crim 1094
CA (Crim Div) (Males LJ, Simler J, Murray J)
21 June 2019

In a trial of wounding with intent contrary to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 s.18, the judge had been entitled not to leave to the jury an alternative count of simple wounding under s.20. The defendant's position was not that he was guilty under s.20 having stabbed the victim without intending to cause really serious harm, but that he was not guilty at all. Accordingly, s.20 had not been an obvious alternative count.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1217
[2019] EWCA Crim 1217
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Warby J, Picken J)
18 June 2019

There was a powerful case that the appellant was a party to a joint enterprise in which he had personally intended that grievous bodily harm would be inflicted on the victim. There was a proper basis on which to conclude that the jury's verdict that he was guilty of murder would not have differed notwithstanding the change in the law of joint enterprise following R. v Jogee (Ameen Hassan) [2016] UKSC 8.

[2019] EWCA Crim 917
[2019] EWCA Crim 917
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ)
22 May 2019

A sentence of four and a half years' imprisonment was appropriate in the case of an offender who had pleaded guilty to attempting to cause grievous bodily harm with intent after carrying out a sustained assault on his partner.

[2019] EWCA Crim 934
[2019] EWCA Crim 934
CA (Crim Div) (Holroyde LJ, Picken J, Sir David Foskett)
21 May 2019

A total sentence of six years and six months' imprisonment for aggravated burglary, wounding with intent and having an offensive weapon was unduly lenient and a term of nine years was substituted.

[2019] EWCA Crim 621
[2019] EWCA Crim 621
CA (Crim Div) (Thirlwall LJ, Andrews J, Judge Dhir QC)
12 April 2019

The court quashed a sentence of imprisonment for public protection imposed for wounding with intent and replaced it with hospital and restriction orders under the Mental Health Act 1983 s.37 and s.41 respectively. The offender had served more than twice the minimum term ordered and the s.37 and s.41 regime was the most effective way of protecting the public and of monitoring his continued treatment.

[2018] EWCA Crim 2946
[2018] EWCA Crim 2946
CA (Crim Div) (Flaux LJ, Whipple J, Sir Brian Keith)
18 December 2018

A 10-year extended sentence, comprising a seven-year custodial period and a three-year extension period, was appropriate in the case of a 17-year-old offender who had pleaded guilty to affray, having a bladed article and wounding with intent after he stabbed a teenager in the street, causing serious injuries.

[2018] EWCA Crim 2958
[2018] EWCA Crim 2958
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Carr J, Judge Picton)
22 November 2018

A determinate sentence of 12 years' imprisonment for attempting to cause grievous bodily harm was unduly lenient and replaced with a 17-year extended sentence where the offender had attacked a sex worker with a claw hammer having been released on licence from a life sentence for manslaughter. He was a dangerous offender and the judge had been wrong in principle when sentencing to take account of how the Parole Board would approach the offender's release.

[2018] EWCA Crim 2552
[2018] EWCA Crim 2552
CA (Crim Div) (Davis LJ, Butcher J, Judge Katz QC)
9 November 2018

The court upheld an offender's convictions for indecent assault and attempting to inflict grievous bodily harm committed against his younger brother when they were both under 18. It could not be said that the manner in which the trial was conducted by the offender's own counsel was so flawed as to render his conviction unsafe.

[2018] EWCA Crim 2464
[2018] EWCA Crim 2464
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Burnett LCJ, Phillips J, Cutts J)
7 November 2018

An eight-year extended sentence, comprising a five-year custodial term and a three-year extension period, was appropriate in the case of a 15-year-old who had been convicted of wounding with intent. The nature of the offence, the stabbing of a woman on the street at night, together with the offender's lack of self-control and propensity for aggression meant that he was dangerous and an extended sentence was necessary to protect the public.

[2018] EWCA Crim 2960
[2018] EWCA Crim 2960
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Picken J, Julian Knowles J)
27 July 2018

An extended sentence, comprising a custodial term of nine years and an extended licence period of three years, was appropriate in the case of a young offender who had been convicted of wounding with intent after repeatedly stabbing a man with a kitchen knife.

[2018] EWCA Crim 1985
[2018] EWCA Crim 1985
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Sir John Saunders, Judge Mayo)
22 June 2018

A sentence of six years and eight months' imprisonment was appropriate in the case of an offender who had pleaded guilty to grievous bodily harm and attempted robbery. He had gone to the home of a vulnerable acquaintance and, in an incident lasting some 30 minutes, had threatened him with a knife, demanded money, and assaulted him, causing bruising and lacerations to his face and arm and a bleed to the brain.

[2018] EWCA Crim 560
[2018] EWCA Crim 560
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Burnett LCJ, Nicol J, William Davis J)
22 March 2018

Body modification, such as the removal of an ear or nipple, or tongue splitting, performed on a consenting adult by a practitioner with no medical training or qualification, could not form an exception to the general rule in R. v Brown (Anthony Joseph) [1994] 1 A.C. 212 that consent was no defence to causing actual bodily harm or wounding. Even if Parliament or the Supreme Court revisited the general rule and adifferent line was drawn to allow consent to act as a defence to causing actual bodily harm and wounding, body modification caused really serious harm.

[2017] EWCA Crim 2062
[2017] EWCA Crim 2062
CA (Crim Div) (Holroyde LJ, Nicola Davies J, Judge Carey QC)
15 November 2017

A two-year youth rehabilitation order which had been imposed on a 17-year-old offender following his plea of guilty to wounding with intent was unduly lenient. The knife attack which the offender had launched on another youth justified a sentence of three years' detention.

[2017] EWCA Crim 2383
[2017] EWCA Crim 2383
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Holgate J, Sir Kenneth Parker)
8 September 2017

The appellant's conviction for wounding with intent was not rendered unsafe by the fact that he was tried in his absence. By absenting himself despite knowing of the trial date, he had waived his right to attend his trial, and he had been represented by competent counsel.

[2017] EWCA Crim 491
[2017] EWCA Crim 491
CA (Crim Div) (Davis LJ, Holroyde J, Judge Kinch QC)
30 March 2017

Convictions for wounding with intent, assault occasioning actual bodily harm, having an offensive weapon and criminal damage were upheld. The judge had not erred in her summing up and the appellant had not been prejudiced by an agreed admission placed before the jury.

[2017] EWCA Crim 452
[2017] EWCA Crim 452
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Nicola Davies J, Sir Alan Wilkie)
28 March 2017

Sentences of seven years' detention were appropriate in the case of two young offenders who had pleaded guilty to wounding with intent and assault occasioning actual bodily harm after launching a sustained and brutal attack on two gay men.

[2017] NICA 1
[2017] NICA 1
CA (NI) (Morgan LCJ, Weir LJ, Colton J)
9 January 2017

An offender was sentenced to nine years' imprisonment for causing death by dangerous driving where he had consumed a large amount of alcohol, had driven dangerously for a prolonged period and had failed to stop at the scene. In cases of dangerous driving causing grievous bodily harm or death a deterrent sentence had to be imposed.

[2016] EWCA Crim 1971
[2016] EWCA Crim 1971
CA (Crim Div) (Beatson LJ, Haddon-Cave J, Judge Marson QC)
15 November 2016

A sentence of 18 years' imprisonment was appropriate in the case of a man who had been convicted of manslaughter and wounding with intent after stabbing his father to death and injuring his brother with the knife he was using.

[2016] EWCA Crim 1664
[2016] EWCA Crim 1664
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Green J, Judge Aubrey QC)
4 November 2016

The court declined to permit fresh evidence in an appeal against a conviction for wounding with intent. The evidence was hearsay evidence and did not pass the test for admission in the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 s.23(2).

[2016] EWCA Crim 1321
[2016] EWCA Crim 1321
CA (Crim Div) (Sir Brian Leveson PQBD, Holroyde J, May J)
7 September 2016

Medical evidence detailing a baby's injuries that had been shaken was sufficient to justify advice to an appellant that he caused serious bodily injury to the child and to plead guilty to a charge of inflicting grievous bodily harm. A subsequent acquittal from manslaughter as the jury was satisfied that the shaking had not caused the cerebral injuries leading to the child's death years later, did not mean that the defence advanced for manslaughter would have been a successful defence to inflicting grievous bodily harm.

CA (Crim Div) (Holroyde J, Recorder of Birmingham)
17 June 2016

A sentence of 46 months' imprisonment, following guilty pleas to possession of an offensive weapon, criminal damage and racially aggravated unlawful wounding, was reduced to 36 months' imprisonment where, contrary to the sentencing guidelines, the judge had applied the guilty-plea discount to the sentence for unlawful wounding before taking into account the increase for the racially aggravated form of the offence.

[2016] EWCA Crim 1831
[2016] EWCA Crim 1831
CA (Crim Div) (Lloyd Jones LJ, Gilbart J, May J)
9 June 2016

A two-year suspended sentence imposed on a woman who had pleaded guilty to wounding with intent was lenient but not unduly so. A number of mitigating features were present, including the woman's mental health issues and the fact that she was the primary carer of her six-year-old daughter.

[2016] EWCA Crim 1147
[2016] EWCA Crim 1147
CA (Crim Div) (Davis LJ, Gilbart J, Judge Radford)
20 April 2016

A judge had been entitled to go above the ranges indicated in the sentencing guidelines when sentencing offenders for aggravated burglary and wounding with intent involving the use of knives to threaten and torture two victims during a prolonged attack in their home. However, the judge had adopted too high a starting point of 30 years after a trial; a starting point of 25 to 26 years was appropriate.

[2016] EWCA Crim 600
[2016] EWCA Crim 600
CA (Crim Div) (Davis LJ, Gilbart J, Judge Radford)
12 April 2016

A sentence of three-and-a-half years' detention imposed on a 16-year-old for wounding with intent was unduly lenient and replaced with a sentence of seven years' detention. The sentencing judge had made too much allowance for the offender's young age.

[2016] EWCA Crim 723
[2016] EWCA Crim 723
CA (Crim Div) (Sharp LJ, Supperstone J, Judge Farrer QC)
18 March 2016

A total sentence of 10 years' imprisonment, imposed following a conviction for wounding with intent and guilty pleas to violent disorder and aggravated burglary, was unduly lenient. A sentence of 16 years was appropriate for what were very serious offences committed in separate incidents with a background of drugs and gang-related activity.

CA (Crim Div) (McCombe LJ, Green J, Judge Griffith-Jones)
1 March 2016

A total sentence of 11 years instead of 13 years was more appropriate for an offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent and an offence of burglary. Although the offences were serious, the sentence was excessive having regard to all the circumstances.

[2016] EWCA Crim 37
[2016] EWCA Crim 37
CA (Crim Div) (Davis LJ, Cheema-Grubb J, Judge Kinch QC)
5 February 2016

A sentence of 18 months' imprisonment following a guilty plea to wounding with intent was unduly lenient. The victim had been stabbed with a knife three times and was kicked whilst on the ground. A sentence of five years' imprisonment was appropriate in the circumstances.

[2016] EWCA Crim 1
[2016] EWCA Crim 1
CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, Simler J, Judge Wait)
19 January 2016

Refusal to admit a complainant's previous convictions for carrying knives or bladed weapons had had no bearing on whether a defendant had been involved in a joint enterprise wounding with intent in which the complainant had received five knife stab wounds, and did not affect the safety of his conviction.

[2016] EWCA Crim 642
[2016] EWCA Crim 642
CA (Crim Div) (Lloyd Jones LJ, Holgate J, Sir John Griffith Williams)
14 January 2016

A sentence of five years and four months' imprisonment imposed following a plea of guilty to wounding with intent was reduced to four years, where the sentencing judge had erred in placing the offence between categories 1 and 2 of the Definitive Guideline on Assault. The offence fell squarely within category 2, given the broad balance between factors indicating greater harm and greater culpability, and factors indicating lesser harm and lesser culpability.

[2015] EWCA Crim 2305
[2015] EWCA Crim 2305
CA (Crim Div) (Macur LJ, Cooke J, Judge Cutts QC)
28 October 2015

In the appellant's trial for unlawful wounding, the judge had been justified in refusing to allow him to adduce evidence of the victim's bad character in the form of a previous conviction for common assault. That conviction was not important explanatory evidence, nor did it have any other substantial probative value.

[2015] EWCA Crim 2110
[2015] EWCA Crim 2110
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Saunders J, Knowles J)
15 October 2015

The Crown did not oppose an appeal against conviction for wounding with intent and attempting to cause grievous bodily harm where the victim's identification of the appellant had been crucial and new evidence suggested that the victim had offered to retract his statement in exchange for money, significantly undermining his evidence.

CA (Crim Div) (Macur LJ, Goss J, Recorder of Liverpool)
14 October 2015

A conviction for wounding with intent was safe where an offender had run a defence of self-induced automatism and the judge had refused a defence application for an adjournment to obtain expert evidence about the effect that a combination of drugs and alcohol had had on the offender. The defence of automatism was not available to an offender who had induced a state of automatism through their own fault.

[2015] EWCA Crim 2090
[2015] EWCA Crim 2090
CA (Crim Div) (McCombe LJ, Foskett J, Judge Rook QC)
8 October 2015

Sentences of nine years' imprisonment were appropriate following the convictions of two offenders for causing grievous bodily harm with intent. The offenders had perpetrated a motiveless and sustained attack during which they had repeatedly punched and kicked a prone victim. However, neither had a record of a repeated and escalating pattern of violent offending and the risk that they posed could properly be met by a determinate sentence of an appropriate length rather than an extended sentence.

[2015] EWCA Crim 2499
[2015] EWCA Crim 2499
CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, King J, Judge Aubrey QC)
8 October 2015

A young offender's sentence of a fixed custodial term of four years and six months with an extension period of two years for attempted wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, after attacking a rival gang member with a knife on a crowded underground platform, was not manifestly excessive. The judge had been entitled to find that the offender was dangerous for the purposes of the imposition of an extended sentence.

[2015] EWCA Crim 1627
[2015] EWCA Crim 1627
CA (Crim Div) (Lloyd Jones LJ, Blake J, Haddon-Cave J)
24 September 2015

An extended sentence of 12 years, comprising an eight-year custodial term and an extended licence period of four years, was appropriate in the case of the appellant, who had pleaded guilty to wounding with intent and three other offences after attacking people with a knife at a party.

[2015] EWCA Crim 1575
[2015] EWCA Crim 1575
CA (Crim Div) (Holroyde J, Lewis J)
16 September 2015

A judge had correctly placed an offence of wounding with intent in category 2 of the relevant sentencing guideline and imposed a sentence of seven years' imprisonment where the offender had bitten his victim's eyebrow, biting away part of his flesh.

[2015] EWCA Crim 1306
[2015] EWCA Crim 1306
CA (Crim Div) (McCombe LJ, Jeremy Baker J, Lewis J)
30 July 2015

Where an offender had been convicted of an offence of unlawful wounding, but not convicted of an offence of racially aggravated unlawful wounding contrary to the Crime and Disorder Act 1998 s.29(1)(a), the sentencing judge was nevertheless entitled to take into account, as a factor which increased the seriousness of the offence, that it was racially motivated.

CA (Crim Div) (Macur LJ, Green J, Judge Bidder QC)
17 July 2015

A judge was entitled to take a 15-year starting point instead of the usual 12-year starting point for wounding with intent as a result of the aggravating features of the offence, namely the offence being premeditated, the offender being drunk and high at the time of the offence, and his having previous convictions for violent and weapon-related offences.

[2015] EWCA Crim 1185
[2015] EWCA Crim 1185
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Haddon-Cave J, Patterson J)
9 July 2015

A defendant's freedom of choice had been improperly narrowed where he entered a plea of guilty to wounding with intent to cause serious bodily harm without having been advised that by doing so, he was accepting that he intended to cause the complainant really serious bodily harm. Instead of an offence under the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 s.18, the defendant had intended to plead guilty to a s.20 offence. The court therefore substituted a conviction for the s.20 offence for the original conviction.

[2015] EWCA Crim 1186
[2015] EWCA Crim 1186
CA (Crim Div) (Sharp LJ, Supperstone J, Judge Ford QC)
7 July 2015

Fresh evidence relied on by the appellant did not undermine the safety of his conviction for murder and wounding with intent.

CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, Blake J, Taylor J)
24 June 2015

The admission of evidence from two witnesses who claimed to have been intimidated into changing their evidence against an offender did not make the offender's convictions for wounding, violent disorder and possessing a firearm unsafe.

[2015] EWCA Crim 1484
[2015] EWCA Crim 1484
CA (Crim Div) (Laws LJ, Blair J, Holroyd J)
23 June 2015

A conviction for grievous bodily harm with intent was not unsafe on account of insufficient evidence to prove to the required standard that the injuries sustained amounted to "really serious bodily harm". The victim's self-reported harm from injuries sustained when he was attacked by the offenders, should not be discounted just because it was not supported by medical evidence.

[2015] EWCA Crim 1481
[2015] EWCA Crim 1481
CA (Crim Div) (Laws LJ, Blair J, Kenneth Parker J)
19 June 2015

Leave to appeal against a conviction for wounding with intent contrary to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 s.18 was refused where a psychiatrist's report in relation to the complainant did not go to the issue of the offender's response when she claimed she had stabbed the complainant, her partner, in self-defence.

[2015] EWCA Crim 1173
[2015] EWCA Crim 1173
CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, Teare J, Judge Inman QC)
18 June 2015

Extended sentences comprising a four-year detention period and a three-year licence period were appropriate in the case of a 14-year-old and a 15-year-old who had been convicted of wounding two youths by stabbing them in the course of an unprovoked attack in a public place.

CA (Crim Div) (Bean LJ, Spencer J, Judge Cooke QC)
16 June 2015

A sentence of two-and-a-half years' imprisonment for inflicting grievously bodily harm was not manifestly excessive where the victim had been left partially deaf and the offender had many previous convictions for violence.

[2015] EWHC 1477 (QB)
[2015] EWHC 1477 (QB)
QBD (McGowan J)
21 May 2015

An individual failed to show that his detention for offences of affray and wounding had breached his rights under ECHR art.5. The Crown Court had clearly had jurisdiction to pass the sentence it had imposed, and he had been unable to demonstrate that the court had sentenced in a way that involved a gross and obvious irregularity, that it had failed to observe a statutory condition precedent, or that it had acted in a way that was arbitrary.

[2015] EWCA Crim 1103
[2015] EWCA Crim 1103
CA (Crim Div) (Rafferty LJ, Hickinbottom J, Turner J)
14 May 2015

The appellant's conviction for attempted robbery and wounding with intent was safe despite the fact that the defence team had not obtained unused material which revealed inconsistencies in the victim's account: every possible opportunity had been taken during the trial to exploit known inconsistencies in his account.

[2015] EWCA Crim 1119
[2015] EWCA Crim 1119
CA (Crim Div) (Pitchford LJ, Walker J, Wyn Williams J)
14 May 2015

There were special circumstances which meant that a sentence of two years' imprisonment, suspended for two years, was not unduly lenient following a plea of guilty to an offence of wounding with intent. The offence was completely out of character and the offender's state of mind had been affected by a combination of anti-depressant medication and alcohol. She was a single mother who had demonstrated considerable remorse and there were concerns about the impact upon her children if she received a sentence of immediate imprisonment.

[2015] NICA 17
[2015] NICA 17
CA (NI) (Morgan LCJ, Deeny J, Treacy J)
17 April 2015

A three-and-a-half-year determinate custodial sentence for an offence of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm which had involved the use of weapons and shod feet was unduly lenient. A sentence of five years was substituted. It was an entirely appropriate case for the activation of the offenders' previously suspended sentences to run consecutively.

CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Haddon-Cave J, Patterson J)
24 March 2015

A sentencing judge had been justified in imposing a sentence of 11 years' imprisonment in respect of a series of commercial robberies committed over a four-month period, and in ordering that sentence to run consecutively to a 14-year sentence which had been imposed for a separate offence of wounding committed during the same four-month period. The starting point of 16 years' imprisonment adequately reflected the offender's criminality, and the judge was entitled to conclude that his past criminal record was such as to constitute a significantly aggravating factor which distinguished him from his co-defendants.

[2015] EWCA Crim 625
[2015] EWCA Crim 625
CA (Crim Div) (Fulford LJ, Stewart J, Edis J)
13 March 2015

In a case referred by the Attorney General, the court found unduly lenient a sentence of two-and-a-half years' imprisonment where the offender had pleaded guilty to wounding with intent after biting off a piece of a person's ear; the appropriate sentence was four-and-a-half years' imprisonment.

[2014] EWCA Civ 1554
[2014] EWCA Civ 1554
CA (Civ Div) (Lord Dyson MR, Treacy LJ, King LJ)
4 December 2014

The drinking of alcohol to excess by a pregnant woman in the knowledge that it would harm her unborn child did not amount to the criminal offence of inflicting grievous bodily harm by administering a noxious substance to any other person contrary to the Offences against the Person Act 1861 s.23 so as to entitle the born child to criminal compensation as the victim of a violent crime. A foetus was not to be regarded as a separate legal person and, except under statute, could not be the victim of a crime of violence. Consequently, an unborn child could not constitute "any other person" within s.23.

[2014] NICA 74
[2014] NICA 74
CA (NI) (Girvan LJ, Coghlin LJ, Horner J)
17 November 2014

A sentence of eight-and-a-half years' imprisonment imposed on one member of a drunken sectarian mob for, among other things, grievous bodily harm with intent would be maintained, but a sentence of three years' imprisonment imposed on another member of that mob for affray would be reduced to one year's imprisonment in view of a disparity with the sentence imposed on a co-defendant.

[2014] EWCA Crim 2407
[2014] EWCA Crim 2407
CA (Crim Div) (Rafferty LJ, Simler J, Henriques J)
11 November 2014

An extended sentence of 13-and-a-half years' imprisonment imposed on an offender following his guilty pleas to criminal damage, breach of a restraining order, wounding with intent and two offences of possessing offensive weapons, all committed during an attack against his estranged wife, was reduced to one of 11-and-a-half years, where the offender had been suffering from post-traumatic stress disorder at the time of the attack.

CA (Crim Div) (Rafferty LJ, Kenneth Parker J, McGowan J)
6 November 2014

It was appropriate to quash an offender's conviction for wounding with intent contrary to the Offences against the Person Act 1861 s.18, and to replace it with a conviction of simple wounding under s.20, where, on the facts, an alternative charge under s.20 should have been placed before the jury.

[2014] EWCA Crim 2176
[2014] EWCA Crim 2176
CA (Crim Div) (Sir Brian Leveson PQBD, Elisabeth Laing J, William Davis J)
15 October 2014

An alternative verdict of unlawful wounding contrary to the Offences against the Person Act 1861 s.20 should have been left to the jury at a trial for an offence of wounding with intent contrary to s.18 where it had been open to the jury to reject the appellant's defence of self-defence and the victim's allegation that she had threatened to kill him.

[2014] EWCA Crim 2010
[2014] EWCA Crim 2010
CA (Crim Div) (Sharp LJ, Thirlwall J, Globe J)
3 October 2014

An indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of seven years was appropriate for an offence of wounding with intent involving a sudden attack on a 64-year-old man, where eight severe stab wounds had been inflicted. It had been open to the judge to conclude that the offender posed a risk of serious harm upon release.

CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Bean J, Foskett J)
7 August 2014

In a trial for wounding with intent, a judge had been entitled to admit into evidence the accused's previous conviction for an assault, which had been committed in similar circumstances to the instant offence, on the basis that it went to the central issue of the identification of the perpetrator.

DC (Ouseley J, Griffith Williams J)
17 July 2014

The power under the Mental Health Act 1983 s.35 to remand an accused to hospital for a report on his mental condition could not be used to enable the Crown to obtain evidence about whether the accused had the intention, or the capacity to form the intention, to commit an offence of grievous bodily harm. The Divisional Court quashed a s.35 order made by the Crown Court, even though the Senior Courts Act 1981 s.29(3) excluded High Court jurisdiction, because the misinterpretation of s.35 was a defect so severe that it deprived the Crown Court of jurisdiction to make the order.

[2014] EWCA Crim 1414
[2014] EWCA Crim 1414
CA (Crim Div) (Pitchford LJ, Turner J, Carr J)
20 June 2014

A sentence of three-and-a-half years' detention was appropriate in the case of a young offender who had pleaded guilty to conspiracy to rob and been convicted of inflicting grievous bodily harm.

[2014] EWCA Crim 1241
[2014] EWCA Crim 1241
CA (Crim Div) (Jackson LJ, Wilkie J, Sir Colin Mackay)
6 June 2014

An appellant's defence of using reasonable force in defence of another had been a live issue that ought to have been put to the jury, so her conviction for unlawfully and maliciously causing grievous bodily harm was quashed. The circumstances of the co-appellant's offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent had been properly reflected in a starting point of six years' imprisonment, so that term was substituted for a seven-year term of imprisonment.

[2014] EWCA Crim 1073
[2014] EWCA Crim 1073
CA (Crim Div) (Elias LJ, Jeremy Baker J, Judge Peter Collier QC (Recorder of Leeds))
15 May 2014

Convictions for attempting to cause grievous bodily harm and attempted theft were safe even though the judge had erred in advising the jury that it could draw an adverse inference in respect of the defendant's no-comment interview. The case had turned on identification evidence in respect of which the judge had given adequate directions

[2014] EWCA Crim 889
[2014] EWCA Crim 889
CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, Bean J, Judge Lakin)
8 May 2014

A conviction of inflicting grievous bodily harm contrary to the Offences Against the Person Act 1861 s.20 for infecting his partner with an incurable genital herpes virus was deemed safe, after the consideration of fresh evidence as to whether the appellant's guilty plea had been fully informed and voluntary.

QBD (Admin) (Collins J)
9 April 2014

A decision not to grant bail to a 17-year-old with no previous convictions, following his charge for grievous bodily harm, was Wednesbury unreasonable as the judge had relied on speculative and highly improbable matters that had been neither raised by the prosecution nor put to the defence.

[2014] EWCA Crim 860
[2014] EWCA Crim 860
CA (Crim Div) (Fulford LJ, Griffith Williams J, Judge Griffith-Jones)
27 February 2014

Although circumstantial, there was strong evidence in a case involving charges of conspiracy to rob and wounding with intent that the defendants were part of a gang who conspired to attack and rob a man in his friend's flat whilst the owner, who had been duped by one of the conspirators, was out of the way. The decision that there was a case to answer was justified by the evidence.

[2014] EWCA Crim 70
[2014] EWCA Crim 70
CA (Crim Div) (Fulford LJ, Hickinbottom J, Simler J)
17 January 2014

A judge had not erred in finding that there was a significant risk to the public from an offender who had been convicted of grievous bodily harm. Although it was unfortunate that the judge had said that the sentence was "required" by law, his general approach to the statutory scheme and his saying that the imposition of an indeterminate sentence was "appropriate" showed that he knew the sentence was not mandatory and had considered less restrictive sentencing options.

[2013] EWCA Crim 2509
[2013] EWCA Crim 2509
CA (Crim Div) (Jackson LJ, Holroyde J, Judge Milford QC)
20 December 2013

A judge had erred in allowing only a 20 per cent discount for an offender's guilty plea to wounding with intent. CCTV showed that the victim had initiated the violence; the offender could therefore have raised issues of self-defence and lack of intent. Further, although the offender was dangerous, the public could be adequately protected by the imposition of an extended sentence with appropriate licence conditions, rather than a sentence of imprisonment for public protection.

[2013] EWCA Crim 2397
[2013] EWCA Crim 2397
CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, Royce J, Andrews J)
19 December 2013

The court upheld a conviction for manslaughter and two counts of unlawful wounding where the offender had deliberately driven into another car, resulting in the death of the driver and injury to the two passengers. Evidence given at the trial by an accident and collision investigator had not been inadmissible, and fresh evidence, which the offender claimed could undermine that evidence, did not satisfy the Criminal Appeal Act 1968 s.23(2)(b).

[2013] EWCA Crim 2585
[2013] EWCA Crim 2585
CA (Crim Div) (Jackson LJ, Holroyde J, Judge Milford QC)
6 December 2013

Where an offender subject to a suspended sentence for drug offences re-offended within the operational period and was convicted of grievous bodily harm, the fact that the new offence was of a different category from the previous offence was no good ground for objecting to activation of the suspended sentence. The fact that he had complied with supervision requirements attached to the suspended sentence was not sufficient to justify activating only part of it.

CA (Crim Div) (Sharp LJ, Griffith Williams J, Lindblom J)
22 November 2013

In a trial for an offence of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm contrary to the Offences against the Person Act 1861 s.18, the judge should have left an alternative count under s.20 to the jury. However, notwithstanding that irregularity, the appellant's conviction was safe as the jury must have been sure that he had the necessary intent under s.18 as they convicted him of that offence on the evidence.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1990
[2013] EWCA Crim 1990
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Thomas LCJ, Wilkie J, Jay J)
8 November 2013

An appeal against convictions on 12 counts of sexual assault by penetration, four counts of rape and a count of unlawful wounding was dismissed where a judge had been correct not to treat as evidence the offender's admissions made in a written statement and police interview as the prosecution had only relied on them to a very limited extent.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1849
[2013] EWCA Crim 1849
CA (Crim Div) (Pitchford LJ, Keith J, Lewis J)
24 October 2013

Convictions for both causing and attempting to cause grievous bodily harm with intent were safe where a judge had not misdirected or failed to direct a jury appropriately in relation to certain issues.

[2013] EWCA Crim 2711
[2013] EWCA Crim 2711
CA (Crim Div) (Fulford LJ, Burnett J, Hickinbottom J)
26 September 2013

A judge's mistaken explanation as to the length of time an offender would serve in custody for an offence of wounding with intent did not render the sentence unfair, but the aggravating factors the judge identified did not justify a sentence so far in excess of the starting point.

CA (Crim Div) (Lloyd-Jones LJ, Coulson J, Holroyde J)
12 September 2013

Where a participant in a gang fight was convicted of violent disorder but acquitted of two counts of wounding with intent, there was no inconsistency between the verdicts: there was evidence of actions that were discrete from the actions behind the wounding counts on the basis of which the jury could convict of violent disorder.

[2013] NIQB 103
[2013] NIQB 103
QBD (NI) (Morgan LCJ)
9 September 2013

The court was entitled to interfere with the Public Prosecution Service's decision to prosecute a 17-year-old girl following an allegation of inflicting grievous bodily harm. The decision-maker had not taken into account public interest considerations when determining that the girl's case was not suitable for diversionary disposal.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1553
[2013] EWCA Crim 1553
CA (Crim Div) (Sharp J, Judge Bevan QC)
26 July 2013

A sentence of two-and-a-half years' imprisonment imposed following an offender's late guilty plea to inflicting grievous bodily harm in a drunken assault on a taxi driver at night was not manifestly excessive.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1149
[2013] EWCA Crim 1149
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Judge LCJ, Mackay J, Griffith Williams J)
5 July 2013

Although a failure to disclose the first description of a suspect given by an eye-witness prior to an identification parade had been a clear breach of PACE Codes of Practice Code D, it did not render the subsequent conviction for murder and wounding with intent unsafe, given the powerful support provided to the identification evidence by the other circumstantial evidence.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1202
[2013] EWCA Crim 1202
CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, MacDuff J, Dingemans J)
28 June 2013

A minimum term of 15 years for murder, causing grievous bodily harm with intent and perverting the course of justice had been unduly lenient and would be increased to 17 years, but the sentences of the other offenders would not be altered.

[2013] NICA 38
[2013] NICA 38
CA (NI) (Morgan LCJ, Higgins LJ, Coghlin LJ)
28 June 2013

Sentences imposed on three offenders aged 17, 14 and 18 for attempted grievous bodily harm with intent after they had kicked and punched their victim on the ground did not reflect the seriousness of the attack and the need for deterrence. The sentences were unduly lenient and were increased.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1053
[2013] EWCA Crim 1053
CA (Crim Div) (Sir John Thomas (President QBD) , Openshaw J, Stewart J)
27 June 2013

A conviction for wounding with intent was quashed as unsafe where the trial judge had admitted a witness statement, having been satisfied that the witness was in genuine fear of giving evidence, but where the statement was inherently unreliable in ways that a jury direction could not possibly have redressed.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1293
[2013] EWCA Crim 1293
CA (Crim Div) (Elias LJ, Mackay J, Sir Roderick Evans)
27 June 2013

The conviction of an offender for grievous bodily harm was not safe, as although he claimed not to have been at the scene and had relied on the defence of alibi there was evidence from which a jury could infer that if he was at the scene he had acted in self-defence, and the judge had wrongly refused to put that to the jury.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1345
[2013] EWCA Crim 1345
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Ouseley J, Foskett J)
26 June 2013

Although a victim had only been shot in the leg despite the gunman's proximity to him, evidence of prior death threats and extensive planning meant that there had been a case to answer on a count of conspiracy to murder rather than merely conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1278
[2013] EWCA Crim 1278
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, MacDuff J, Judge Cooke QC)
19 June 2013

Sentences of five years' and four years' imprisonment imposed for wounding with intent imposed on a 19-year-old with a relevant criminal history and a 20-year-old with no convictions or cautions were unduly lenient and were replaced by sentences of eight years and seven years respectively in a young offender institution. They had taken part in an appalling group attack on a man helpless on the ground, kicking, punching and stamping on him and inflicting deep lacerations with a handsaw.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1147
[2013] EWCA Crim 1147
CA (Crim Div) (Elias LJ, Edwards-Stuart J, Judge Ford QC (Recorder of Bristol))
14 June 2013

Sentences of 15 years' imprisonment for two counts of wounding with intent imposed on offenders who had been 16 years and 9 months and 17 years and 8 months old at the time of the offences were not manifestly excessive. The attacks had consisted of unprovoked, brutal, gangland-type violence inflicted on innocent passers-by and the judge had given careful thought to possible reduction of sentence in consideration of their ages.

CA (Crim Div) (Fulford LJ, Openshaw J, Sir David Calvert-Smith)
7 June 2013

A hospital order and restriction order were imposed in place of a sentence of imprisonment for public protection for wounding with intent, where the offender's personality disorder had not been diagnosed at the time of sentence.

[2013] EWCA Crim 1049
[2013] EWCA Crim 1049
CA (Crim Div) (Fulford LJ, Wilkie J, King J)
21 May 2013

A defendant's conviction for possession of a firearm with intent to endanger life had not, in the circumstances, been inconsistent with his acquittal of wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm.

CA (Crim Div) (Aikens LJ, Silber J, Royce J)
10 May 2013

A conviction for causing grievous bodily harm with intent, caused during a fight involving a group of males outside a pub, was quashed where the identification evidence in relation to one of the group members was so weak that the matter ought to have been withdrawn from the jury following a submission of no case to answer.

[2013] EWCA Crim 893
[2013] EWCA Crim 893
CA (Crim Div) (Rafferty LJ, Wyn Williams J, Judge Russell QC (Recorder of Preston))
10 May 2013

A sentencing judge had adopted the correct approach in exercising his discretion to impose a determinate sentence of 16 years' imprisonment for an offence of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, where he believed that the resulting licence period would be sufficient to protect the public, rather than imposing an indeterminate sentence.

[2013] EWCA Crim 673
[2013] EWCA Crim 673
CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, Globe J, Judge Peter Collier QC (Recorder of Leeds))
9 May 2013

The jury's verdicts giving rise to three offenders' respective convictions for causing grievous bodily harm with intent, murder and manslaughter, arising out of an assault on a victim who was placed in a car which was set on fire, were not inconsistent so as to render the convictions unsafe. The different verdicts represented an assessment of the evidence by the jury in the different cases.

[2013] EWCA Crim 728
[2013] EWCA Crim 728
CA (Crim Div) (Davis LJ, Andrew Smith J, Jeremy Baker J)
25 April 2013

Although an offender had taken no physical part in a serious assault, in which the victim was stabbed, burned and had his wrist broken, he had played a full part by being there throughout and encouraging the attack by his presence. His sentence of 27 months' imprisonment for unlawful wounding was not excessive, and his continued presence and extensive criminal history justified his receiving the same sentence as a co-defendant who had broken the victim's wrist.

[2013] EWCA Crim 650
[2013] EWCA Crim 650
CA (Crim Div) (McCombe LJ, Fulford J, Judge Collier QC)
12 April 2013

Sentences of three years' imprisonment, thirty months' imprisonment and 27 months' imprisonment were appropriate in the case of four young offenders who had variously pleaded guilty to, or had been convicted of, wounding with intent following a planned and sustained gang attack upon another youth.

[2013] EWCA Crim 597
[2013] EWCA Crim 597
CA (Crim Div)
11 April 2013

Sentences of three years and six months' detention for an offence of wounding with intent contrary to the Offences against the Person Act 1861 s.18 and 18 months consecutive for burglary were unduly lenient. The principle of totality applied but it was not appropriate to reflect that principle in the sentences imposed for both wounding and burglary.

[2013] EWCA Crim 529
[2013] EWCA Crim 529
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ (Vice President), Sweeney J, Judge Radford (Recorder of Redbridge))
26 March 2013

A sentence of five years' imprisonment, imposed after a guilty plea to wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, was not manifestly excessive where the offender had bitten off a portion of the victim's nose during a fight, causing severe injuries.

CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Singh J, Judge Moss QC)
19 March 2013

There was no truth in allegations made by parents convicted of wounding and wilfully neglecting their 18-month-old daughter that they had received an unfair trial on the basis of the judge being biased. Criminal trials involved an adversarial process that required counsel to withstand robust comments and continue to firmly and fiercely represent their lay clients.

[2013] EWCA Crim 520
[2013] EWCA Crim 520
CA (Crim Div) (Moore-Bick LJ, Wilkie J, Leggatt J)
19 March 2013

In imposing an extended sentence of 15 years for wounding with intent where the offender had squeezed the victim's throat until she was unconscious and inflicted multiple wounds with a pair of scissors, the judge had selected too high a starting point. The injuries sustained, none of which required stitches, were not really serious in the context of the offence. An extended sentence of 12 years was substituted.

[2013] EWCA Crim 223
[2013] EWCA Crim 223
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ, Hickinbottom J, Holroyd J)
12 March 2013

The court considered the issues of insanity, automatism and voluntary intoxication in a case of attempted murder, one of wounding with intent and one of aggravated arson.

[2013] EWCA Crim 409
[2013] EWCA Crim 409
CA (Crim Div) (Leveson LJ, Mitting J, Males J)
12 March 2013

Sentences of 12 years' imprisonment imposed on offenders for causing grievous bodily harm with intent were replaced with 10 years' imprisonment where, although there had been a significant degree of premeditation, a vulnerable victim and a sustained or repeated attack, the injuries caused were not serious in the context of the offence so as to, by themselves, place the offence into category 1 of the sentencing guidelines.

[2013] EWHC 4352 (Fam)
[2013] EWHC 4352 (Fam)
Fam Div (Moor J)
11 March 2013

The court determined matters concerning residence, contact, reporting restrictions and disclosure to the police in long-standing family proceedings involving a mother who was charged with murder and with grievous bodily harm to one of her children.

[2013] EWCA Crim 250
[2013] EWCA Crim 250
CA (Crim Div) (Leveson LJ, Kenneth Parker J, Judge Stokes QC)
8 February 2013

A sentence of imprisonment for public protection for wounding with intent was inappropriate where the presumption of risk in the assessment of the offender's dangerousness need not have applied. A determinate sentence of seven years' imprisonment was substituted.

[2013] EWCA Crim 313
[2013] EWCA Crim 313
CA (Crim Div) (Davis LJ, King J, Kenneth Parker J)
31 January 2013

Sentences of 16 years' imprisonment imposed on three co-offenders for an offence of grievous bodily harm with intent for a premeditated, sustained attack with weapons on an unarmed man, against a background of a local feud, were not manifestly excessive in view of the serious nature of the assault and the aggravating features.

[2013] EWCA Crim 132
[2013] EWCA Crim 132
CA (Crim Div) (Treacy LJ, Simon J, David Clarke J)
29 January 2013

In criminal trials, there was much wisdom in a discussion between the judge and counsel taking place after the conclusion of evidence and prior to the summing up so that counsel could, if necessary, remind the judge of any directions he had resolved earlier in the proceedings to give. In the instant case, a conviction for wounding with intent was unsafe where the judge resolved to give a "strong" direction to the jury as to the effect of hearsay evidence from a co-accused, but then overlooked to actually give it.

[2013] EWCA Crim 123
[2013] EWCA Crim 123
CA (Crim Div) (Jackson LJ, Globe J, Judge Beaumont QC)
17 January 2013

In a case of unlawful wounding, the judge had not erred in allowing to be admitted the evidence of an accident-and-emergency consultant who had made a statement, served five weeks before the trial, which cast doubt on the defendant's account of how the victim had sustained his injuries.

[2012] EWCA Crim 3117
[2012] EWCA Crim 3117
CA (Crim Div) (Rafferty LJ, Globe J, Leggatt J)
20 December 2012

A sentence of imprisonment for public protection for an offence by an obsessively jealous man of wounding with intent, with a minimum term of 32 months was not warranted. Substituted for it was an extended sentence of imprisonment for public protection; a custodial term of five years and four months, and an extension period of two years and eight months.

[2012] EWCA Crim 3120
[2012] EWCA Crim 3120
CA (Crim Div) (Rafferty LJ DBE, Globe J, Leggatt J)
20 December 2012

A sentence of two years' imprisonment for wounding with intent was quashed as unduly lenient where the offender had attacked his victim with a knife that he had been carrying around for personal protection. A four-year sentence was appropriate.

[2012] EWCA Crim 2750
[2012] EWCA Crim 2750
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Judge LCJ, Fulford J, Bean J)
18 December 2012

An earlier conviction for an offence of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm contrary to the Offences against the Person Act 1861 s.18 was admissible to prove, following the death of the victim, that the defendant was guilty not merely of causing grievous bodily harm with intent, but of murder.

[2012] EWCA Crim 2969
[2012] EWCA Crim 2969
CA (Crim Div) (Gross LJ, MacDuff J, Judge Elgan Edwards QC (Recorder of Chester))
13 December 2012

A judge's failure to give the jury an expanded direction on the meaning of intent in relation to an allegation of wounding with intent was not a misdirection and did not render the conviction unsafe.

[2012] EWCA Crim 3168
[2012] EWCA Crim 3168
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ, Ramsey J, Irwin J)
27 November 2012

A rehabilitation order of 18 months imposed on a young offender for wounding with intent was held to be unduly lenient and was replaced with an 18-month detention and training order.

[2012] EWCA Crim 2728
[2012] EWCA Crim 2728
CA (Crim Div) (Moore-Bick LJ, Silber J, Judge Cooke QC )
14 November 2012

In a case where the defendant alleged that a charge of wounding with intent was based on the victim's false allegations, the judge had been correct to refuse defence counsel permission to cross-examine the victim about false allegations he had allegedly made in the past against his mother; those allegations did not have "substantial probative value" in relation to a matter in issue for the purposes of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.100(1)(b).

CA (Crim Div) (Moore-Bick LJ, Silber J, Judge Cooke QC)
13 November 2012

In a case involving offences of grievous bodily harm committed against a child by the child's mother and her boyfriend, a judge had not erred in refusing the boyfriend's application to adduce evidence of the mother's apparent animosity towards her child. Relevant information had already been put before the jury and the evidence sought to be adduced added no substantial probative value to the matter in issue between the defendants.

[2012] EWHC 3878 (Admin)
[2012] EWHC 3878 (Admin)
DC (Gross LJ, Singh J)
9 November 2012

A European arrest warrant did not comply with the requirements of the Extradition Act 2003 s.2 where it stated that the person sought was charged with murder which carried a life sentence when, as a result of decisions of Polish appeal courts, he could only be found guilty of fatal wounding which carried a maximum ten year sentence.

[2012] EWCA Crim 2391
[2012] EWCA Crim 2391
CA (Crim Div) (Pitchford LJ, Hickinbottom J, Judge Boney QC)
24 October 2012

A sentence of two years' imprisonment for an offence of wounding with intent where the victim was slashed in the face with a knife was unduly lenient and a sentence of three years' imprisonment was substituted.

[2012] EWCA Crim 2008
[2012] EWCA Crim 2008
CMAC (Rafferty LJ, Irwin J, Nicola Davies J)
4 October 2012

The convictions of two soldiers of causing grievous bodily harm with intent and actual bodily harm on a joint enterprise basis were quashed where neither defendant had the protection of a direction on joint enterprise or self-defence and where the findings of fact of the Court Martial Board did not support the allegation of joint enterprise from the outset.

[2012] EWCA Crim 1906
[2012] EWCA Crim 1906
CA (Crim Div) (Rafferty LJ DBE, Cox J DBE, Globe J)
17 July 2012

A judge had erred in finding that an attempt to inflict grievous bodily harm with intent fell within category 1 of the sentencing guidelines for assault on the basis that there had been the potential for greater harm or serious injury. However, given the serious aggravating features, which indicated a high degree of culpability and gravity, the offence was to be placed at the top of the sentence range in category 2 and the appropriate sentence was one of nine years' imprisonment before any credit for a guilty plea rather than 12 years.

[2012] EWCA Crim 1706
[2012] EWCA Crim 1706
CA (Crim Div) (Rafferty LJ, Judge Bevan QC)
13 July 2012

A sentence of detention for public protection, imposed following a guilty plea to offences of false imprisonment and wounding with intent, was quashed and an extended sentence substituted where there was available to the appeal court information as to the offender's conduct in detention which had not been available to the sentencing judge and which indicated a sustained intention to progress.

[2012] EWCA Crim 1809
[2012] EWCA Crim 1809
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Royce J, Haddon-Cave J)
13 July 2012

A trial judge had been entitled on the material before her to conclude that a sentence of imprisonment for public protection was appropriate for an offence of wounding with intent where the offender, who had 26 previous convictions and was assessment as being at a high risk of possessing the potential to cause serious harm to the public, had intimidated a bus user before attacking him with a knife as he tried to exit the bus.

[2012] EWCA Crim 1623
[2012] EWCA Crim 1623
CA (Crim Div) (Davis LJ, Sweeney J, Supperstone J)
6 July 2012

Convictions for wounding with intent and violent disorder were unsafe and were quashed as the judge had misdirected the jury in respect of identification evidence.

[2012] EWCA Crim 1704
[2012] EWCA Crim 1704
CA (Crim Div) (Moore-Bick LJ, Kenneth Parker J, Judge Goss QC (Recorder of Newcastle))
25 June 2012

A starting point of 18 years for a sentence of imprisonment for public protection imposed following a guilty plea by a 23-year-old to offences of grievous bodily harm and carrying a firearm with criminal intent was too high where no injury had been inflicted on the victim, having regard to the need to respect the proportionality of the offence in relation to sentences for attempted murder.

[2012] EWCA Crim 1541
[2012] EWCA Crim 1541
CA (Crim Div) (Sir John Thomas (President), Collins J, Calvert-Smith J)
20 June 2012

A sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a specified period of almost four years was appropriate in the case of a 28-year-old offender who had pleaded guilty to causing grievous bodily harm with intent and to assault occasioning actual bodily harm, the offences arising from street violence between rival groups of young men.

[2012] EWCA Crim 1075
[2012] EWCA Crim 1075
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, Cooke J, Beatson J)
18 May 2012

A conviction for having an offensive weapon was unsafe as the judge had failed to direct the jury as to the elements of the offence. However, the offender's conviction for wounding with intent was safe as, despite the judge's misdirections, the jury would have inevitably found that the offender's use of a hammer was with more force than was reasonable in the circumstances.

[2012] EWCA Crim 264
[2012] EWCA Crim 264
CA (Crim Div) (Richards LJ, Field J, Openshaw J)
24 February 2012

Whilst a judge was wrong to allow the prosecution to adduce evidence of an offender's conversation with a police officer made in breach of the Codes of Practice C:10.1, the case against the offender was a strong one and his convictions for wounding with intent, aggravated burglary and possession of a firearm at the time of committing an offence were safe.

[2012] EWCA Crim 244
[2012] EWCA Crim 244
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ (Vice President), Beatson J, Cranston J)
7 February 2012

A sentence of 32 months' imprisonment was appropriate in the case of a man who had pleaded guilty to unlawful wounding after injuring his mother with an axe in a drunken domestic dispute.

[2012] EWCA Crim 253
[2012] EWCA Crim 253
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, Hickinbottom J, Judge Warwick McKinnon)
27 January 2012

Convictions for dangerous driving, inflicting grievous bodily harm and unlawful wounding were safe despite the judge having incorrectly made reference to unlawfulness in his summing up to the jury.

[2011] EWCA Crim 3226
[2011] EWCA Crim 3226
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ, Simon J, Lang J)
29 November 2011

Sentences of 16 months' imprisonment which had been imposed following the appellants' pleas of guilty to unlawful wounding were justified. The judge had given an indication that he would impose a suspended sentence but it was not a binding indication and no unfairness had arisen from his departure from what had been merely a provisional view.

[2011] EWCA Crim 3164
[2011] EWCA Crim 3164
CA (Crim Div) (Moses LJ, MacDuff J, Singh J)
31 October 2011

It was not appropriate to lengthen an unduly lenient sentence of three years and four months' imprisonment, imposed on an offender for wounding with intent and possession of an offensive weapon, where the offender's brother had committed suicide while the offender had been in prison and so he had been unable to attend the funeral.

[2011] EWCA Crim 3343
[2011] EWCA Crim 3343
CA (Crim Div) (Stanley Burnton LJ, Royce J, Judge Gilbart QC)
14 October 2011

A sentence of three years and three months' imprisonment was appropriate where an appellant with relevant previous convictions had pleaded guilty to a serious offence of unlawful wounding, and a further offence of assault occasioning actual bodily harm committed while on bail for the first offence.

[2011] EWCA Crim 2323
[2011] EWCA Crim 2323
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ (Vice President), Cranston J, Hickinbottom J)
12 October 2011

Sentences of three-and-a-half and four years' imprisonment following late pleas of guilty to conspiracy to cause grievous bodily harm were unduly lenient as the judge had given too much credit for late guilty pleas and had categorised the offences as Category 2 rather than Category 1. Sentences of seven and eight years' imprisonment were imposed.

[2011] EWCA Crim 1720
[2011] EWCA Crim 1720
CA (Crim Div) (Leveson LJ, Swift J, Griffith Williams J)
7 July 2011

A 12-month sentence of imprisonment, suspended for two years, for wounding with intent was unduly lenient where the offender had smashed a glass into the victim's face. His sentence was quashed and replaced with a three-year sentence of imprisonment.

[2011] EWCA Crim 1295
[2011] EWCA Crim 1295
CA (Civ Div) (Richards LJ, Roderick Evans J, Judge Nicholas Cooke QC)
25 May 2011

Where a judge had been entitled to allow certain DNA evidence, and the interpretation of it by the Crown's witness, to go before a jury, and his summing up in respect of that evidence had been adequate, there was no reason to doubt the safety of the appellant's convictions for possession of a prohibited firearm and causing grievous bodily harm.

[2011] EWCA Crim 893
[2011] EWCA Crim 893
CA (Crim Div) (Rix LJ, Roderick Evans J, Judge Gordon)
14 April 2011

Convictions for wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm were upheld where the accused had chosen not to have a victim's statements read out or to call any other witnesses because that victim refused to give evidence and so could not be cross-examined. The accused had understood the trial process but had considered that he could manipulate it to his advantage when he understood that the victim would be unwilling to attend.

[2010] EWCA Crim 2878
[2010] EWCA Crim 2878
CA (Crim Div) (Stanley Burnton LJ, King J, Nicol J)
6 December 2010

A conviction for unlawful wounding was quashed where the judge, in summing up, had minimised the significance of a discrepancy in the evidence.

[2010] EWCA Crim 1622
[2010] EWCA Crim 1622
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ (V-P), Wyn Williams J, King J)
15 July 2010

The House of Lords in R. v Rahman (Islamur) [2008] UKHL 45, [2009] 1 A.C. 129 had not altered the rule that, in cases of murder by joint enterprise, for an accessory to be guilty it had to be shown that he foresaw that the principal would act with the intent either to kill or to do grievous bodily harm.

[2010] EWCA Crim 1722
[2010] EWCA Crim 1722
CA (Crim Div) (Leveson LJ, Roderick Evans J, Judge Stokes QC Recorder of Nottingham )
5 July 2010

A sentence of 12 months' imprisonment suspended for two years imposed on an offender for an offence of wounding with intent contrary to the Offences against the Person Act 1861 s.18 was unduly lenient and was, accordingly, replaced with one of 30 months' detention in a young offender institution.

[2010] EWCA Crim 1566
[2010] EWCA Crim 1566
CA (Crim Div) (Elias LJ, Gross J, Foskett J)
25 June 2010

A judge was entitled to impose a six-year extended sentence on an offender following his guilty plea to an offence of wounding with intent despite previously indicating, in accordance with the procedure in R. v Goodyear (Karl) [2005] EWCA Crim 888, [2005] 1 W.L.R. 2532, that a three-year determinate sentence would be imposed. Reports read after the indication had been given suggested that it would be in the public interest to impose the extended sentence, and the defendant had not suffered any prejudice as he had been given the opportunity to change his plea.

[2010] EWCA Crim 1459
[2010] EWCA Crim 1459
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, Andrew Smith J, David Clarke J)
24 June 2010

Total sentences of imprisonment of three years and nine months for robbery and aggravated burglary and four years for causing grievous bodily harm with intent imposed on two offenders were unduly lenient. They were therefore replaced with sentences of imprisonment for public protection with minimum terms of nine and six years respectively.

[2010] EWCA Crim 1480
[2010] EWCA Crim 1480
CA (Crim Div) (Elias LJ, Wyn Williams J, King J)
18 June 2010

A recorder's summing up was not as clear as it should have been regarding whether an intention to wound was sufficient to constitute an intention to cause grievous bodily harm but, in light of concessions made at trial by the defendant relating to the weapon and the type of injury it would cause, his conviction for wounding with intent was safe.

[2010] EWCA Crim 1588
[2010] EWCA Crim 1588
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ (V-P) , Wyn Williams J, King J)
17 June 2010

A two-year supervision order imposed for an offence of grievous bodily harm with intent to which the offender had pleaded guilty was not unduly lenient when proper account of all the mitigating features associated with the offence were taken into account; in particular that the offender was a vulnerable young girl who had been provoked with the threat of sexual assault.

[2010] EWCA Crim 1150
[2010] EWCA Crim 1150
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, David Clarke J, Openshaw J)
25 May 2010

The decision of the judge, during the course of a murder trial, to permit admission of closed-circuit television footage from a bar and the consequent development of the prosecution case that that evidence was consistent with the defendant having been involved an attack on a victim had not rendered the defendant's convictions for murder and wounding with intent unsafe.

[2010] EWCA Crim 1302
[2010] EWCA Crim 1302
CA (Crim Div) (Aikens LJ, Slade J DBE, Judge Wadsworth QC)
12 May 2010

The court quashed a conviction for wounding with intent in circumstances where the jury's verdict was so illogical as to make the conviction unsafe.

[2010] EWCA Crim 1064
[2010] EWCA Crim 1064
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Judge LCJ, David Clarke J, Lloyd Jones J)
29 April 2010

A community punishment and rehabilitation order imposed on a 17-year-old who had pleaded guilty to wounding with intent after carrying out a premeditated attack with a hammer was unduly lenient. It was replaced with a detention and training order of 18 months.

[2010] EWCA Crim 353
[2010] EWCA Crim 353
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Judge LCJ, Simon J, Royce J)
11 February 2010

A suspended sentence of two years' imprisonment imposed on an offender for wounding with intent was not unduly lenient where the offender, who had been attacked in his home by the victim with an axe, stabbed the victim once under serious provocation. The sentence was, however, unlawful because the maximum sentence which could be suspended as a matter of law was 12 months' imprisonment; a suspended sentence of 12 months' imprisonment was therefore substituted.

[2010] EWCA Crim 352
[2010] EWCA Crim 352
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Judge LCJ, Penry-Davey J, Irwin J)
10 February 2010

A sentence of five years' imprisonment following a guilty plea to an offence of wounding with intent was unduly lenient even though the offender was of impeccable good character and had pleaded guilty at an early stage. Making every allowance for the features in mitigation, the appropriate sentence was eight years' imprisonment for what was a horrific revenge attack on a defenceless man in a case of mistaken identity.

[2009] EWCA Crim 2701
[2009] EWCA Crim 2701
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Judge LCJ, Simon J, Royce J)
10 December 2009

A life sentence with a minimum term of 16 years' imprisonment imposed on an offender for murder, wounding with intent and attempted murder was unduly lenient and the minimum term was increased to 25 years' imprisonment in circumstances where the offender had repeatedly stabbed his step-son to death whilst he was asleep.

[2009] EWCA Crim 2610
[2009] EWCA Crim 2610
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Judge LCJ, Simon J, Royce J)
26 November 2009

A total sentence of 10 years' imprisonment imposed on an offender following his convictions for inflicting grievous bodily harm, rape and assault by penetration was unduly lenient where he had raped and sexually assaulted his partner while she was paralysed as a result of actions. It was replaced with a sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of nine years.

[2009] EWCA Crim 2368
[2009] EWCA Crim 2368
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ (V-P) , Mackay J, Davis J)
21 October 2009

Where the precise concatenation of events leading up to offences of murder, wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm and assault occasioning actual bodily harm was not specifically foreseen by the group who committed the offences but what had occurred was within their contemplation, common enterprise was made out.

[2009] EWCA Crim 2262
[2009] EWCA Crim 2262
CA (Crim Div) (Stanley Burnton LJ, Penry-Davey J, Sharp J)
20 October 2009

Although a sentence of three-and-a-half years' detention imposed on a young offender for wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm was not manifestly excessive in isolation, there was disparity with the sentence imposed on a co-accused who was convicted after trial and sentenced to four years' detention as the judge had not given enough credit for the offender's guilty plea.

[2009] EWCA Crim 2307
[2009] EWCA Crim 2307
CA (Crim Div) (Rix LJ, McCombe J, Burnett J)
9 October 2009

An 18-month detention and training order imposed following a guilty plea to an offence of grievous bodily harm was quashed and a 12-month detention and training order substituted where the offender had fled the scene of the incident and had denied the offence when he was arrested several weeks later, but had pleaded guilty in the Crown Court. The judge had failed to properly apply the definitive guideline relating to discounts for guilty pleas which required the court to apply an appropriate discount to the sentence determined as the starting point and to then make a further reduction to reflect time spent in custody on remand.

[2009] EWCA Crim 2169
[2009] EWCA Crim 2169
CA (Crim Div) (Maurice Kay LJ, Silber J, Burnett J)
17 September 2009

A suspended sentence of 52 weeks' imprisonment for offences of unlawful wounding and aggravated burglary was unduly lenient and was replaced with a total sentence of three years and six months' imprisonment. Although violence had not been used during the aggravated burglary, that point receded in significance when violence was used moments later, giving rise to the unlawful wounding offence.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1971
[2009] EWCA Crim 1971
CA (Crim Div) (Maurice Kay LJ, Irwin J, Burnett J)
16 September 2009

Where a defendant did not have a previous conviction for a specified offence or had not received a custodial sentence of at least four years, it had not been lawful to extend his sentence under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 s.227. A total sentence of seven years' imprisonment for offences of unlawful wounding, possession of an offensive weapon and battery was reduced to one of three years and nine months.

[2009] EWCA Crim 2082
[2009] EWCA Crim 2082
CA (Crim Div) (Rix LJ, Tugendhat J, Judge Pert)
7 September 2009

A sentence of two years' detention was appropriate in the case of a young offender who had pleaded guilty to an offence of wounding and who had spent some 16 months on bail subject to a night-time curfew.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1701
[2009] EWCA Crim 1701
CA (Crim Div) (Roderick Evans J, Cranston J, Sir Anthony May (President QB))
5 August 2009

Given that it was inappropriate for the court to receive fresh evidence that was either not central to the issue at trial or was simply a reiteration of the defendant's expert's evidence advanced at trial, but by a different expert, the defendant's conviction for causing grievous bodily harm with intent was safe.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1789
[2009] EWCA Crim 1789
CA (Crim Div) (Stanley Burnton LJ, Butterfield J, Judge Baker QC)
31 July 2009

The case against the offender who was convicted of wounding with intent and affray was compelling and fresh evidence would not have reasonably affected the decision of the jury to convict.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1817
[2009] EWCA Crim 1817
CA (Crim Div) (Richards LJ, Cranston J, Judge Bevan QC)
31 July 2009

A detention for public protection with a minimum term of two years imposed on a 17-year-old boy following his guilty pleas to wounding with intent and assault occasioning actual bodily harm was quashed as the judge had misunderstood the provisions of the Criminal Justice Act 2003 and had failed to consider an extended sentence. A total extended sentence of six years' detention with a custodial term of four years and an extended licence period of two years was appropriate.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1761
[2009] EWCA Crim 1761
CA (Crim Div) (Sir Anthony May (President QB), Roderick Evans J, Cranston J)
22 July 2009

Psychologists' reports commissioned and produced after conviction and sentence that detailed an offender's limited intellectual ability did not impugn the sentencing judge's decision to impose an indeterminate sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of five years for conspiracy to rob and wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm where the defendant had contributed substantially to the conspiracy and there was clear evidence of dangerousness.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1539
[2009] EWCA Crim 1539
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ DBE, Foskett J, Hickinbottom J)
14 July 2009

A total sentence of four years and three months' detention imposed for wounding with intent, perverting the course of justice, and assault occasioning actual bodily harm was manifestly excessive and was reduced to two years and nine months' detention due to the exceptional circumstances, namely the existence of extreme provocation.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1590
[2009] EWCA Crim 1590
CA (Crim Div) (Keene LJ, Holman J, Recorder of Nottingham)
9 July 2009

A judge had erred in failing to leave an alternative verdict of unlawful wounding to a jury considering a charge of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm, as it was a realistically available verdict on the evidence. It was particularly important that an alternative verdict was left to a jury where the offence charged required proof of a specific intent and the alternative did not.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1490
[2009] EWCA Crim 1490
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Judge LCJ, Simon J, Blair J)
2 July 2009

Sentences of nine and six years' detention for two young offenders convicted of rape and, in one case, grievous bodily harm were unduly lenient where the female victim, who was just 16, had been subjected to a group sex attack and had caustic soda thrown over her. The sentences were increased to 14 and 9 years' detention.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1374
[2009] EWCA Crim 1374
CA (Crim Div) (Keene LJ, Dobbs J DBE, Recorder of Nottingham)
26 June 2009

A judge had directed a jury in accordance with the Judicial Studies Board specimen directions on intention, which were a framework to provide assistance and guidance and not to be followed slavishly, and an offender's conviction for wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm was safe.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1465
[2009] EWCA Crim 1465
CA (Crim Div) (Keene LJ, Dobbs J DBE, Recorder of Nottingham)
23 June 2009

Whilst a judge was not bound to accept the opinion of a probation officer that a young offender convicted of wounding with intent should not be sentenced to an extended sentence or detention for public protection, there had to be cogent reasons for departing from that opinion.

[2009] EWCA Crim 2943
[2009] EWCA Crim 2943
CA (Crim Div) (Richards LJ, Gloster J DBE, Blake J)
19 June 2009

Whilst a judge had been right to rule that an offender being sentenced for an offence of wounding with intent committed whilst in a depressive state posed a substantial risk of being a danger to the public, he had been wrong to impose a sentence of imprisonment for public protection. An extended sentence comprising five years and six months' imprisonment with a term of extended licence of four years was substituted.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1871
[2009] EWCA Crim 1871
CA (Crim Div) (Scott Baker LJ, King J, Judge Moss QC)
12 June 2009

A judge was not wrong to have given a direction under the Criminal Justice and Public Order Act 1994 s.34 in circumstances where the offender had given a no-comment interview, but had issued a prepared statement and a defence case statement. Further, the direction had been clear and had not affected the safety of his conviction for wounding with intent to commit grievous bodily harm.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1750
[2009] EWCA Crim 1750
CA (Crim Div) (Scott Baker LJ, King J, Judge Moss QC)
12 June 2009

An extended sentence of eight years comprising a custodial term of four years and an extension period of four years imposed on an offender for grievous bodily harm with intent and robbery following his guilty plea was unduly lenient and the judge had clearly fallen into error. The custodial part of the sentence was increased to seven years and the licence period remained.

[2009] EWCA Crim 1869
[2009] EWCA Crim 1869
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, Rafferty J DBE, Cranston J)
21 May 2009

Convictions for assault by penetration of a child under the age of 13 and unlawful wounding were safe where the judge had been right to admit hearsay evidence consisting of statements made by the 30-month-old victim.

[2009] EWCA Crim 549
[2009] EWCA Crim 549
CA (Crim Div) (Sir Anthony May (President QB), Rafferty J DBE, Swift J DBE)
3 March 2009

Convictions for assault and unlawful wounding were unsafe, as the judge had failed to remind the jury of any of the material contradictions and inconsistencies between the complainants' evidence. As the offender had served a significant part of his sentence, it was not in the interests of justice to order a retrial.

[2009] EWCA Crim 544
[2009] EWCA Crim 544
CA (Crim Div) (Thomas LJ, Blake J, Burnett J)
18 February 2009

A conviction for unlawful wounding with intent was quashed, as the judge had misdirected the jury by stating that they had to be sure that the prosecution had proved that the offender had intended to cause grievous bodily harm or to wound, rather than directing them that the prosecution had to prove intention to cause really serious harm. As there was not enough evidence to prove that the offender had intended to cause really serious harm, the conviction was replaced with one of unlawful wounding.

[2009] EWCA Crim 140
[2009] EWCA Crim 140
CA (Crim Div) (Toulson LJ, McCombe J, David Clarke J)
21 January 2009

A total sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of seven-and-a-half years imposed following pleas of guilty to theft, battery, wounding with intent and aggravated burglary was manifestly excessive and the minimum term was reduced to five years' imprisonment.

[2008] EWCA Crim 2999
[2008] EWCA Crim 2999
CA (Crim Div) (Sir Anthony May (President QB), Simon J, Dame Heather Steel DBE)
21 November 2008

The minimum term of a sentence of imprisonment for public protection imposed for wounding with intent was reduced from nine years to seven-and-a-half years on an offender that had also committed drug and firearms offences. A co-defendant's sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of four years was upheld.

[2008] EWCA Crim 2647
[2008] EWCA Crim 2647
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ DBE, Stadlen J, Judge Rook QC)
21 October 2008

A sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of six years and two weeks imposed for manslaughter and wounding with intent was replaced with a sentence of detention for public protection with a minimum term of six years owing to the offender's age. Apart from that, the judge's reasoning and conclusions were sound, and the fact that the victims had thrown things at the offender's house was properly categorised as low provocation.

[2008] EWCA Crim 2514
[2008] EWCA Crim 2514
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Judge LCJ, Owen J, Sweeney J)
16 October 2008

A sentence of two years' detention and training imposed for wounding with intent was unduly lenient and was replaced with four years' detention and training as, even though the offender was only 15 years old, the crime was very grave.

[2008] EWCA Crim 2303
[2008] EWCA Crim 2303
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Judge LCJ, Owen J, Christopher Clarke J)
9 October 2008

Where an offender had attacked his neighbour in his home with a knife, inflicting repeated and serious injuries upon him, a sentence of four years' imprisonment, after a conviction by a jury of wounding with intent, was unduly lenient and was replaced with one of seven years.

[2008] EWCA Crim 2007
[2008] EWCA Crim 2007
CA (Crim Div) (Pill LJ, King J, Dame Heather Steel)
30 July 2008

A sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of two-and-a-half years for wounding with intent and assault by beating was replaced by a sentence of five years' imprisonment, as the previous convictions taken into account when the judge had assessed dangerousness should have been disregarded, since they were very old and had been committed when the offender was a teenager.

[2008] EWCA Crim 1869
[2008] EWCA Crim 1869
CA (Crim Div) (Pill LJ, King J, Dame Heather Steel)
30 July 2008

Applying modern standards of fairness, a conviction from 1986 for grievous bodily harm with intent was unsafe where the appellant had been denied access to a solicitor and contemporaneous records of police interviews had not been made.

[2008] EWCA Crim 1754
[2008] EWCA Crim 1754
CA (Crim Div) (Gage LJ, Silber J, Judge Radford)
15 July 2008

A conviction for seven counts of robbery and one count of unlawful wounding had not been made unsafe by the admission of evidence from a criminal intelligence analyst, as the evidence had been probative and was not unfairly prejudicial. A concurrent sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of four years was unlawful and was substituted with two years' imprisonment and an extension period of two years.

[2008] EWCA Crim 3317
[2008] EWCA Crim 3317
CA (Crim Div) (Maurice Kay LJ, Silber J, Judge Stokes QC Recorder of Nottingham )
4 July 2008

Where an offender convicted of possessing a firearm with intent and wounding with intent had been found to be dangerous a sentence of imprisonment for public protection was required: a minimum term of six years was appropriate where the impact of the offences had been to cause serious physical and mental harm to the victims and the offender had a record of previous convictions for offences with serious aggravating features.

[2008] EWCA Crim 1532
[2008] EWCA Crim 1532
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers LCJ, Dobbs J, Underhill J)
24 June 2008

Having regard to the sentencing categories in the sentencing guidelines, a period of three years' imprisonment for grievous bodily harm imposed on a 42-year-old well-respected family man, who had been largely out of trouble for 15 years, was unduly lenient even though the man was unlikely to have become involved in the incident but for the actions of his friend, the co-accused. The sentencing judge had taken the right approach in disregarding the offender's previous record, but still a man of his age could be expected to behave appropriately and not indulge in serious violence.

[2008] EWCA Crim 1403
[2008] EWCA Crim 1403
CA (Crim Div) (Thomas LJ, Forbes J, Roderick Evans J)
12 June 2008

A sentence of detention for public protection with a minimum term of two-and-a-half years imposed for wounding with intent, attempted robbery and inflicting grievous bodily harm was not wrong in principle as the judge had assessed an offender's future risk to the public and correctly applied the dangerousness test.

CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, Jack J, Griffith Williams J)
22 May 2008

An offender had satisfied the dangerousness test and therefore a sentence of detention for public protection with a minimum term of four years imposed for attempted robbery and wounding with intent was not manifestly excessive. However, due to the age of the offender he should have been sentenced to imprisonment for public protection rather than detention for public protection.

[2008] EWCA Crim 1283
[2008] EWCA Crim 1283
CA (Crim Div) (Dyson LJ, Openshaw J, Judge Gordon)
14 May 2008

Even though the prosecution had not complied with a disclosure order it was not an abuse of process for it to call a witness whom it had previously declared unreliable, and therefore a conviction for unlawful wounding was not unsafe.

[2008] EWCA Crim 1194
[2008] EWCA Crim 1194
CA (Crim Div) (Dyson LJ, Openshaw J, Judge Gordon)
14 May 2008

A sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of five years was appropriate for an offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent which had left the victim in a vegetative state.

[2008] EWCA Crim 969
[2008] EWCA Crim 969
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, Blake J, Sir Christopher Holland)
2 May 2008

A judge had erred in imposing a sentence of life imprisonment with a minimum term of 30 years for murder where he had failed to make a discount in the sentence to reflect that the murder was not premeditated. The only enterprise premeditated by the offender had been robbery and he might have shared an intention to facilitate escape by inflicting grievous bodily harm as was necessary for that purpose.

[2008] EWCA Crim 1061
[2008] EWCA Crim 1061
CA (Crim Div) (Lord Phillips of Worth Matravers LCJ, Pitchford J, Dobbs J)
23 April 2008

It had not been an abuse of process for the prosecution to accept a guilty plea from a co-defendant to an offence of unlawful wounding rather than wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm but to refuse to accept such a plea from the defendant.

[2008] EWCA Crim 790
[2008] EWCA Crim 790
CA (Crim Div) (Thomas LJ, Irwin J, Blair J)
6 March 2008

A sentence of two years' imprisonment imposed after a trial for attempting to cause grievous bodily harm with intent was unduly lenient and outside the range of what could properly be imposed; it was appropriate to substitute a sentence of four years' imprisonment.

[2008] EWHC 506 (Admin)
[2008] EWHC 506 (Admin)
QBD (Admin) (Silber J)
3 March 2008

A youth court had erred in refusing to grant a stay of prosecution for an offence of grievous bodily harm in circumstances where a promise had been made by a police officer during interview that the matter would be dealt with by way of a final warning.

[2008] EWCA Crim 236
[2008] EWCA Crim 236
CA (Crim Div) (Keene LJ, Owen J, Sir Richard Curtis)
29 January 2008

An extended sentence of four years for an offence of unlawful wounding was excessive in light of a defendant's substantial personal mitigation and her guilty plea entered at the earliest opportunity.

[2007] EWCA Crim 3304
[2007] EWCA Crim 3304
CA (Crim Div) (Richards LJ, Openshaw J, Judge Stephens QC)
12 December 2007

A sentence of detention for public protection with a specified minimum term of one year was not inappropriate in respect of an offence of wounding with intent where, although by the time of sentence the offender had stopped his drug use and was being treated for a previously untreated mental illness, he had a significant number of previous convictions for offences involving violence and danger to the public, and there was a significant risk of serious harm in the future.

[2007] EWCA Crim 3424
[2007] EWCA Crim 3424
CA (Crim Div) (Thomas LJ, Mackay J, Cox J)
11 December 2007

A sentence of eight years' imprisonment imposed for two offences of incitement to cause grievous bodily harm with intent and incitement to solicit murder was not manifestly excessive.

[2007] EWCA Crim 3106
[2007] EWCA Crim 3106
CA (Crim Div) (Richards LJ, Openshaw J, Judge Stephens QC)
4 December 2007

An offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent committed against a former sexual partner following the discovery that he was HIV positive and which resulted in significant permanent disability was not so serious as to merit a life sentence; a sentence of imprisonment for public protection with a minimum term of six years was substituted.

[2007] EWCA Crim 2800
[2007] EWCA Crim 2800
CA (Crim Div) (Tuckey LJ, Foskett J, Judge Patience QC)
5 November 2007

A sentence of six-and-a-half years' imprisonment for wounding with intent imposed on a guilty plea after the 20-year-old offender had attacked the victim without provocation, striking him in the eye with a glass so as to cause the loss of sight in the eye, was reduced to one of five years to give effect to the offender's plea of guilty, his youth and previous good character, and his evident remorse.

[2007] EWCA Crim 2353
[2007] EWCA Crim 2353
CA (Crim Div) (Maurice Kay LJ, Jack J, Simon J)
14 September 2007

A sentence of four years and nine months' imprisonment was appropriate in the case of a woman of previous good character who had been convicted of wounding with intent after twice stabbing her boyfriend in an unprovoked attack.

[2007] EWCA Crim 2333
[2007] EWCA Crim 2333
CA (Crim Div) (Maurice Kay LJ, Jack J, Simon J)
12 September 2007

A sentence of 12 months' detention suspended for two years together with 150 hours' unpaid work, imposed following an 18-year-old offender's guilty plea to an offence of wounding with intent, was unduly lenient and was replaced with an immediate sentence of three years and three months' detention, in circumstances where the offender had armed himself with a knife and stabbed an innocent member of the public in the neck at night.

[2007] EWCA Crim 2435
[2007] EWCA Crim 2435
CA (Crim Div) (Gage LJ, Treacy J, Ramsey J)
21 August 2007

A total sentence of three years and six months' imprisonment for offences arising out of illegal money lending activities which included kidnap, unlawful wounding, blackmail and carrying on a consumer credit business without a licence was unduly lenient. A total sentence of six years and nine months' imprisonment was substituted.

[2007] EWCA Crim 1887
[2007] EWCA Crim 1887
CA (Crim Div) (Dyson LJ, Forbes J, Judge Rogers QC)
9 July 2007

A conviction for unlawful wounding was quashed where there was fresh evidence that cast doubt on the reliability of identification evidence and the safety of the conviction.

[2007] EWCA Crim 2215
[2007] EWCA Crim 2215
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, McCombe J, Field J)
4 July 2007

A sentence of three years' imprisonment for wounding with intent using a knife was unduly lenient as it failed to reflect the gravity of the offence. A sentence of five-and-a-half years' imprisonment was substituted.

[2007] EWCA Crim 2216
[2007] EWCA Crim 2216
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, McCombe J, Field J)
4 July 2007

A sentence of five years' imprisonment was appropriate in the case of a 20-year-old man who had been convicted of causing grievous bodily harm with intent after instigating and taking part in a sustained and serious assault on an innocent man.

[2007] EWHC 1321 (QB)
[2007] EWHC 1321 (QB)
QBD (Langstaff J)
15 June 2007

A minimum term of 17 years was appropriate for an offender who had been 20 years old at the time he took part in a planned revenge attack on the occupants of a car, in which he and three or four others used axes and swords, killing one person and seriously wounding four others.

[2007] EWHC 1323 (QB)
[2007] EWHC 1323 (QB)
QBD (Langstaff J)
15 June 2007

The appropriate minimum term was 27 years for an offender who, at the age of 19, had taken part in an armed revenge attack on the occupants of a car, killing one and seriously wounding the other four, and then a few months later as part of a gang had taken hostage a vulnerable youth, beaten him to death and burnt his body.

[2007] EWCA Crim 1367
[2007] EWCA Crim 1367
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ, Saunders J, Sir John Blofeld)
25 May 2007

A sentence of five years' imprisonment following a guilty plea to wounding with intent was not unduly lenient.

[2007] EWCA Crim 1271
[2007] EWCA Crim 1271
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ, Saunders J, Sir John Blofeld)
22 May 2007

A 12-month detention and training order had been unduly lenient for offences of false imprisonment, unlawful wounding and burglary since a judge had misunderstood the sentencing powers available to him.

[2007] EWCA Crim 1292
[2007] EWCA Crim 1292
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ, Saunders J, Sir John Blofeld)
22 May 2007

A two-year detention and training order had been unduly lenient for an offence of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm where the defendant, who was 17-and-a-half at the time, had armed himself in advance and had undertaken a pre-meditated revenge attack. The appropriate sentence was three-and-a-half years' detention.

[2007] EWCA Crim 1530
[2007] EWCA Crim 1530
CA (Crim Div) (Scott Baker LJ, Mitting J, Recorder of Swansea)
16 May 2007

A sentence of eight months' imprisonment, suspended for 18 months, following a guilty plea to an offence of wounding with intent, was unduly lenient and was increased to three years' imprisonment in circumstances where, although the offender was of previous good character, had shown real remorse and the victim had not sustained permanent injury, the offender had deliberately armed himself with a weapon, entered the victim's home at night as a trespasser and assaulted the victim whilst he was asleep.

[2007] EWCA Crim 1068
[2007] EWCA Crim 1068
CA (Crim Div) (Hughes LJ, Bean J, Saunders J)
8 May 2007

Convictions for inflicting grievous bodily harm and using threatening, abusive or insulting words or behaviour were unsafe where a judge had allowed the jury to consider alternative verdicts seven hours into their deliberations and had deprived the defendants of the opportunity to address the jury on that basis.

[2007] EWCA Crim 1231
[2007] EWCA Crim 1231
CA (Crim Div) (Goldring J, Swift J)
20 April 2007

The imposition of two consecutive extended sentences totalling 10 years, consisting of an overall custodial term of five years' imprisonment and a total extended licence period of five years, for offences of assault occasioning actual bodily harm and unlawful wounding, was manifestly excessive, given the level of violence and injury. Two concurrent extended sentences, comprising an overall custodial term of four years and a total extended licence period of two years, adequately reflected the offender's overall criminality and the seriousness of his behaviour.

[2007] EWHC 766 (QB)
[2007] EWHC 766 (QB)
QBD (Dobbs J)
4 April 2007

A minimum term of 15 years' imprisonment for murder was imposed on the offender under the Criminal Justice Act 2003 where there was no evidence of intention to kill as opposed to cause grievous bodily harm, and mitigating factors included a guilty plea.

[2007] EWCA Crim 147
[2007] EWCA Crim 147
CA (Crim Div) (Sir Igor Judge (President), Gray J, Ramsey J)
23 January 2007

A sentence of two years' imprisonment for causing grievous bodily harm with intent and assault occasioning actual bodily harm was unduly lenient where the offender had acted in an extraordinarily violent manner in what could be considered a revenge attack.

[2006] EWHC 3244 (QB)
[2006] EWHC 3244 (QB)
QBD (Royce J)
21 December 2006

A minimum term of 11 years was appropriate for the murder of a family friend where, although the offender had had prior possession of the weapon, the offence had lacked any substantial degree of premeditation and he had intended to cause grievous bodily harm rather than to commit murder.

[2006] EWHC 3038 (QB)
[2006] EWHC 3038 (QB)
QBD (Mackay J)
19 December 2006

In the circumstances, minimum terms of 13 and 11 years' imprisonment were set following convictions for murder and wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm.

[2006] EWCA Crim 3335
[2006] EWCA Crim 3335
CA (Crim Div) (Keene LJ, Walker J, Recorder of Birmingham)
8 December 2006

A judge who had deferred for six months the sentencing of a young offender who had pleaded guilty to assault occasioning actual bodily harm and grievous bodily harm had failed to take into account the gravity of the offences and was mistaken in thinking that she was obliged to respect a supervision order imposed three days previously for a less severe offence.

[2006] EWCA Crim 3184
[2006] EWCA Crim 3184
CA (Crim Div) (Gage LJ, Calvert-Smith J, Judge Warwick McKinnon)
29 November 2006

Where a defendant had crossed the relevant age threshold between the commission of the offence and the date of conviction, the starting point for the court in sentencing was how that particular defendant would have been sentenced at the date of the offence. In the instant case, a supervision order of 12 months was appropriate in the case of a 14-year-old girl who had pleaded guilty to wounding with intent after stabbing a fellow pupil who had bullied her.

[2006] EWCA Crim 3212
[2006] EWCA Crim 3212
CA (Crim Div) (Scott Baker LJ, Penry-Davey J, Judge Loraine-Smith)
7 November 2006

A sentence of three-and-a-half years' detention imposed on a defendant following his conviction for wounding with intent was unduly lenient where the offence was set against a background of tribal conflict and the defendant had armed himself with a knife in a public place. The sentence was increased to one of five years' detention.

[2006] EWCA Crim 2719
[2006] EWCA Crim 2719
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, Simon J, Lloyd-Jones J)
10 October 2006

A sentence of two-and-a-half years' imprisonment imposed on a defendant for wounding with intent was unduly lenient as it failed to have sufficient regard to the serious and brutal nature of the attack, and a sentence of four years' imprisonment was substituted.

[2006] EWCA Crim 2600
[2006] EWCA Crim 2600
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, Davis J)
22 September 2006

Convictions for causing grievous bodily harm with intent and inflicting grievous bodily harm were unsafe where the trial judge had refused to allow evidence that might reasonably have affected the verdicts of the jury.

[2006] EWCA Crim 2307
[2006] EWCA Crim 2307
CA (Crim Div) (Hallett LJ, Leveson J, Simon J)
7 September 2006

The offender's conviction for unlawful wounding was safe despite the fact that he was absent and unrepresented at his trial. He had dispensed with the services of his legal representatives for no good reason and had made a fully-informed decision not to attend the trial.

[2006] EWCA Crim 1762
[2006] EWCA Crim 1762
CA (Crim Div) (Gage LJ, Bean J, Judge Griffith Williams QC)
4 July 2006

Suspended sentences of six months' imprisonment for offences of unlawful wounding and use of a firearm were quashed and replaced by sentences of six months' immediate imprisonment for each of the wounding offences where the offender had fired his airgun into the street, injuring two people.

[2006] EWCA Crim 1618
[2006] EWCA Crim 1618
CA (Crim Div) (Keene LJ, Crane J, Sir John Blofeld)
20 June 2006

A young offender who posed a significant risk to members of the public of serious harm by committing further specified offences should have been sentenced to detention for public protection rather than custody for life for offences of robbery and wounding with intent.

[2005] EWCA Crim 3367
[2005] EWCA Crim 3367
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Simon J, Dobbs J)
16 November 2005

A suspended sentence of two years' custody following a late guilty plea to wounding with intent was unduly lenient given the aggravating features that there had been no provocation, the defendant had lain in wait for his victim and had four previous convictions including one for unlawful wounding. Whatever the personal views of a judge, it was not for him to disregard the judgments of the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) or the advice of the Sentencing Guidelines Council in deciding the appropriate reduction in sentence for a late guilty plea.

[2005] EWCA Crim 2963
[2005] EWCA Crim 2963
CA (Crim Div) (Hooper LJ, Leveson J, Calvert-Smith J)
24 October 2005

Where a defendant had previously been convicted of wounding with intent and acquitted of attempted murder, a subsequent prosecution for murder following the death of the victim from her injuries was not in breach of the European Convention on Human Rights Protocol 7 Art.4 since the new fact of the death of the victim had emerged since the first trial.

[2005] EWCA Crim 2847
[2005] EWCA Crim 2847
CA (Crim Div) (Sir Igor Judge (President), Roderick Evans J, Sir Charles Mantell)
12 October 2005

Where an indictment had only included a count of wounding with intent contrary to the Offences against the Person Act 1861 s.18 , it had been open to the judge to leave the lesser s.20 offence to the jury. However it was better practice for the s.20 count to be included on the face of the indictment where, as a matter of law, s.20 was available as an alternative to s.18, and where the application of the Criminal Law Act 1967 s.6(3) meant that the alternative would be available even if s.20 were not alleged.

[2005] EWCA Crim 2320
[2005] EWCA Crim 2320
CA (Crim Div) (Latham LJ, Hughes J, Judge Barker QC)
9 August 2005

Notwithstanding the apparent leniency of a non-custodial sentence imposed for an offence of wounding with intent which had resulted in the victim losing his right ear, the sentencing judge had been entitled to conclude that the circumstances of the offender, as highlighted in pre-sentence reports, had justified an exceptional departure from the imposition of a substantial custodial sentence.

[2005] EWCA Crim 1589
[2005] EWCA Crim 1589
CA (Crim Div) (Gage LJ, Stanley Burnton J, Dobbs J)
10 June 2005

A sentence of two years eight months' imprisonment for wounding with intent where the defendant bit the victim's ear, nose and arm was lenient, but was not interfered with as the principle of double jeopardy had to be taken into account and consideration was given to letters from the victim asking for the sentence not to be increased.

[2005] EWCA Crim 1158
[2005] EWCA Crim 1158
CA (Crim Div) (Mance LJ, Judge Stephens QC)
10 May 2005

The offender's convictions for robbery and grievous bodily harm were safe as fresh evidence from an arboriculturalist, which suggested that a finger print lift relied upon by the Crown was not taken from a door of the crime scene, was not admissible as the arboriculturalist lacked the relevant experience or expertise, and the evidence would not have affected the jury's verdict.

[2005] EWCA Crim 574
[2005] EWCA Crim 574
CA (Crim Div) (Latham LJ, Gloster J, Judge Zucker QC)
7 March 2005

On a "not guilty" plea a sentence of two to three years' detention was appropriate for manslaughter caused by one blow severe enough to cause the victim to fall over but the court would not interfere with a sentence of eighteen months' detention taking account of double jeopardy. A sentence of four months' detention was unduly lenient in respect of an attempt to cause grievous bodily harm with a kick to the head or armpit but the court would not interfere in the particular circumstances of the case.

[2005] EWCA Crim 307
[2005] EWCA Crim 307
CA (Crim Div) (Grigson J, Gross J)
8 February 2005

Following a guilty plea to incitement to wound by a man of good character a sentence of four years' imprisonment was manifestly excessive in the light of the non-custodial sentence imposed on the offender who committed the act of wounding.

[2004] EWCA Crim 2958
[2004] EWCA Crim 2958
CA (Crim Div) (Clarke LJ, Gibbs J, Judge Fabyan Evans)
2 November 2004

The sentences imposed on the appellants, following their pleas of guilty to causing grievous bodily harm with intent, were significantly too long In light of the starting point for sentencing.

[2004] EWCA Crim 2723
[2004] EWCA Crim 2723
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Richards J, Bean J)
18 October 2004

A sentence of 12 years' imprisonment should have been imposed on an offender for wounding with intent which had left the victim profoundly disabled for the rest of his life.

[2004] EWCA Crim 2046
[2004] EWCA Crim 2046
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Nelson J, McCombe J)
21 July 2004

A sentence that was deferred for six months was unduly lenient for an offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent and would be increased to two years' imprisonment. The defendant's conviction was safe as, looking at the summing up as a whole, the judge had not misdirected the jury on "serious harm".

[2004] EWCA Crim 2062
[2004] EWCA Crim 2062
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Nelson J, McCombe J)
20 July 2004

Community punishment and rehabilitation orders were unduly lenient for causing grievous bodily harm with intent. Notwithstanding the defendants' youth and their pleas of guilty, and taking into account double jeopardy, the sentences would be increased to two-year detention and training orders for two of the defendants and a 12-month detention and training order in relation to the third to take into account the seven months he spent in custody prior to sentence.

[2004] EWCA Crim 1770
[2004] EWCA Crim 1770
CA (Crim Div) (Judge LJ, Treacy J, Sir Richard Rougier)
24 June 2004

Where a witness, in relation to an offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent, made a statement favourable to the defendant but later gave evidence that she had no recollection of the incident, the defendant was entitled to cross-examine her on the previous written statement by virtue of Criminal Procedure Act 1865, s.5.

[2004] EWCA Crim 1440
[2004] EWCA Crim 1440
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Grigson J, Andrew Smith J)
20 May 2004

In all the circumstances an 18 month detention and training order was unduly lenient for an offence of wounding with intent where the defendant had pushed a broken bottle at least six times into the victim's face.

[2004] EWCA Crim 1623
[2004] EWCA Crim 1623
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Grigson J, Andrew Smith J)
19 May 2004

A sentence of three years' imprisonment for causing grievous bodily harm with intent was unduly lenient in the circumstances of the case where the defendant had attacked his wife with a hammer in front of their 13 year old son.

[2004] EWCA Crim 1625
[2004] EWCA Crim 1625
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Grigson J, Andrew Smith J)
17 May 2004

A sentence of 30 months for wounding with intent, which involved the defendant pushing a bottle in the victim's face was unduly lenient. Following trial a sentence of at least four years could be expected. Taking into account double jeopardy the sentence would be increased to three years six months.

[2004] EWCA Crim 1239
[2004] EWCA Crim 1239
CA (Crim Div) (Latham LJ, Cox J, Judge Beaumont QC)
28 April 2004

A sentence of ten months' imprisonment for the offence of racially aggravated unlawful wounding was unduly lenient given the requirement that the sentencing judge impose an additional period of imprisonment to reflect the gravity of the racial element.

[2004] EWCA Crim 1134
[2004] EWCA Crim 1134
CA (Crim Div) (Latham LJ, Aikens J, Judge Peter Beaumont QC)
22 April 2004

The defendant's convictions for wounding with intent and violent disorder were safe as there had been sufficient evidence to go before the jury and it had not been inconsistent to acquit him of another offence of wounding arising out of the same attack.

[2004] EWCA Crim 764
[2004] EWCA Crim 764
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Douglas Brown J, Newman J)
11 March 2004

The first defendant's conviction for causing grievous bodily harm was unsafe and would be quashed as there had been no evidence that he had encouraged his co-defendant to commit the offence and the judge was wrong to refuse the submission of no case to answer.

[2004] EWCA Crim 465
[2004] EWCA Crim 465
CA (Crim Div) (Potter LJ, Hooper J, Astill J)
19 February 2004

A sentence of ten years' imprisonment for an offence of wounding with intent was manifestly excessive as insufficient credit had been given for the guilty plea.

[2004] EWCA Crim 277
[2004] EWCA Crim 277
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Poole J, Davis J)
28 January 2004

A total sentence of five years' imprisonment for wounding with intent and having an offensive weapon was unduly lenient and would be quashed. In the circumstances an automatic life sentence should have been imposed under Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000 s.109 , the trigger offence being a previous conviction for rape and unlawful wounding.

[2004] EWCA Crim 134
[2004] EWCA Crim 134
CA (Crim Div) (Wakerley J, Davis J, Rose LJ)
15 January 2004

A total sentence of eight years' imprisonment for indecent assault and inflicting grievous bodily harm on an 83-year-old victim was manifestly excessive. The judge failed to give the appropriate discount for the defendant's early pleas of guilty, and the indecent assault was not of the worst kind.

[2003] EWCA Crim 3813
[2003] EWCA Crim 3813
CA (Crim Div) (Rafferty J, Pitchers J)
18 December 2003

The sentence of three years and six months' imprisonment for unlawful wounding was appropriate where there was no mitigation and the victim's injuries were sufficiently serious to merit a sentence close to the maximum.

[2003] EWCA Crim 3239
[2003] EWCA Crim 3239
CA (May LJ, McKinnon J)
6 November 2003

Convictions for attempted murder and burglary with intent to inflict GBH were safe as, in the circumstances, the judge had been right to allow the indictment to be amended and to refuse a stay for abuse of process where the defendant had pleaded guilty to lesser offences of wounding with intent. The judge had correctly directed the jury on expert opinion and the summing up overall was fair and balanced.

[2003] EWCA Crim 2807
[2003] EWCA Crim 2807
CA (Crim Div) (Scott Baker LJ, Henriques J, Stanley Burnton J)
9 October 2003

In all the circumstances, particularly the level of violence, a total sentence of seven and a half years in a young offender institution for wounding with intent and inflicting grievous bodily harm was not manifestly excessive and could not be certified as a longer than commensurate sentence.

[2003] EWCA Crim 2376
[2003] EWCA Crim 2376
CA (Crim Div) (Latham LJ, Gage J, Eady J)
12 August 2003

A conviction for wounding with intent was inconsistent with the appellant's acquittal on two counts of aggravated burglary and the fact that no verdict had been returned on a count of affray.

[2003] EWCA Crim 1909
[2003] EWCA Crim 1909
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Silber J)
16 June 2003

A sentence of two years for causing grievous bodily harm with intent and violent disorder was unduly lenient given the defendant acted as part of a gang. A sentence of three and a half years would be substituted.

[2003] EWCA Crim 3835
[2003] EWCA Crim 3835
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Silber J, Fulford J)
9 June 2003

A total sentence of 15 years in a Young Offender's Institution was manifestly excessive for two counts of grievous bodily harm and a sentence of 10 years would be substituted.

[2003] EWCA Crim 1619
[2003] EWCA Crim 1619
CA (Crim Div) (Kennedy LJ, Pitchers J)
14 May 2003

A sentence of 18 months for aggravated burglary with intent to inflict grievous bodily harm by a husband on his ex-wife was unduly lenient and a sentence of three and a half years would be substituted

[2003] EWCA Crim 684
[2003] EWCA Crim 684
CA (Crim Div) (Mantell LJ, Jack J, Hedley J)
20 February 2003

A community punishment and rehabilitation order was unduly lenient for an offence of wounding with intent. In the circumstances a four-year sentence would have been appropriate, however, the court had to take into account the fact that it was sentencing for a second time and had to make a reduction accordingly.

CA (Judge LJ, Sedley J, Hughes J)
19 October 2002

A total sentence of ten years' imprisonment for causing grievous bodily harm with intent and wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm was not excessive or wrong in principle in all the circumstances of this case as the crimes merited a severe sentence.

[2002] EWCA Crim 2278
[2002] EWCA Crim 2278
CA (Crim Div) (Astill J, Roderick Evans J)
24 September 2002

A sentence for unlawful wounding was reduced from 30 to 21 months' imprisonment as it had not properly reflected either the atmosphere of violence in which the offence had been committed, or the defendant's guilty plea.

[2002] EWHC 1781 (QB)
[2002] EWHC 1781 (QB)
QBD (Keith J)
21 August 2002

An offender convicted of s.20 wounding where a glass was used as a weapon to inflict not insignificant facial injuries could expect a custodial sentence of 12 to 18 months' imprisonment.

[2001] EWCA Crim 2884
[2001] EWCA Crim 2884
CA (Crim Div) (Keene LJ, Sir Richard Tucker, Judge Maddison)
10 December 2001

Where the issue was the identity of the appellant as the offender, evidence of the appellant's previous conviction for unlawful wounding was admissible where victims had said that the blackmailer had warned of a previous stabbing he had committed.

[2001] EWCA Crim 2698
[2001] EWCA Crim 2698
CA (Crim Div) (Potter LJ, Rafferty J, Judge Zucker QC)
4 December 2001

A conviction for wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm was quashed because the judge wrongly gave the impression to the jury that the burden of proof for the defence of automatism lay on the defendant upon the balance of the probabilities without giving a direction about the burden of proof for non-insane automatism.

[2001] EWCA Crim 2837
[2001] EWCA Crim 2837
CA (Crim Div) (Mantell LJ, Wright J, Judge Fox)
29 November 2001

The appropriate sentence for causing grievous bodily harm with intent by striking a victim around the head with a pool cue was a term of imprisonment of six years.

[2001] EWCA Crim 2114
[2001] EWCA Crim 2114
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Butterfield J, Cooke J)
9 October 2001

Concurrent sentences of four years' imprisonment on each of four offences of causing grievous bodily harm with intent were unduly lenient where the defendant had injured police officers by ramming their cars with his vehicle and were substituted with terms of five years.

[2001] EWCA Crim 1984
[2001] EWCA Crim 1984
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Curtis J, Grigson J)
15 August 2001

Where the appellant had been sentenced to life imprisonment under s.2 Crime (Sentences) Act 1997 for wounding with intent, the fact that the qualifying offence was of a different nature was not to be regarded as an exceptional circumstance.

[2001] EWCA Crim 1853
[2001] EWCA Crim 1853
CA (Crim Div) (Latham LJ, Buckley J, Wright J)
6 August 2001

A sentence of eight months' imprisonment for an offence of assault inflicting grievous bodily harm committed during a rugby match was not manifestly excessive.

[2001] EWCA Crim 1906
[2001] EWCA Crim 1906
CA (Crim Div) (Mantell LJ, Rougier J, Grigson J)
30 July 2001

A sentence of four years' imprisonment for wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm where the respondent had attacked an unarmed man with a blade was unduly lenient and was quashed and substituted with a term of five-and-a-half years.

[2001] EWCA Crim 2027
[2001] EWCA Crim 2027
CA (Crim Div) (Kennedy LJ, Potts J, Hallett J)
25 July 2001

Although a non-custodial sentence for wounding with intent to cause serious bodily harm involving a deliberate glassing was unduly lenient, the sentence was not disturbed because of the unique progress made by the defendant subsequent to the conviction.

[2001] EWCA Crim 1626
[2001] EWCA Crim 1626
CA (Crim Div) (Potter LJ, Tomlinson J, McCombe J)
10 July 2001

Allowing for double jeopardy, sentences in the range of five to seven years' imprisonment would have been considered appropriate sentences after a contested trial for offences of wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm where glasses, bottles, or knives had been used in the course of public disturbances. A small measure of distinction was allowed where there had been a private argument which had coincidentally ended in street violence.

[2001] EWCA Crim 1664
[2001] EWCA Crim 1664
CA (Crim Div) (Clarke LJ, Jack J, Judge Neil Dennison QC)
5 July 2001

A total sentence of ten years' imprisonment for offences of robbery and unlawful wounding, where the appellant had robbed a post office and injured the post master in the process, was manifestly excessive and was reduced to a total term of seven years and six months.

[2001] EWCA Crim 1483
[2001] EWCA Crim 1483
CA (Crim Div) (Potter LJ, Tomlinson J, McCombe J)
15 June 2001

Sentences of three and four years' imprisonment imposed on two offenders for wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm where the offenders attacked a man in the street causing him near-fatal injuries, were unduly lenient and were substituted with terms of three years nine months, and six years accordingly.

[2001] EWCA Crim 1491
[2001] EWCA Crim 1491
CA (Crim Div) (Potter LJ, Tomlinson J, McCombe J)
11 June 2001

A sentence of 18 months' imprisonment for wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm where the defendant had bitten off the tip of the victim's nose was not unduly lenient.

[2001] EWCA Crim 1066
[2001] EWCA Crim 1066
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Leveson J, Mittings J)
25 April 2001

A life sentence imposed on an offender who pleaded guilty to wounding with intent, and had a previous conviction for causing grievous bodily harm, but did not pose a danger to the public, was quashed and substituted with the determinative sentence of four-and-a-half years' imprisonment.

[2001] EWCA Crim 1037
[2001] EWCA Crim 1037
CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Rougier J, McCombe J)
26 March 2001

Whilst there were mitigating factors, a sentence of three years' imprisonment for an offence of assault occasioning grievous bodily harm with intent was unduly lenient in the circumstances and was substituted with a term of four years' imprisonment.

[2001] EWCA Crim 486
[2001] EWCA Crim 486
CA (Crim Div) (Judge Mettyear QC, McCombe J, Pill LJ)
6 March 2001

A defendant's appeal against convictions for wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm and an act tending to pervert the court of justice was allowed because the cumulative unfairness of commentary by the judge during his summing up rendered the convictions unsafe.

CA (Crim Div) (Otton LJ, Hidden J, Judge Richard Brown)
27 November 2000

A sentence of ten years' imprisonment was manifestly excessive for an offence of wounding with intent arising out of domestic violence where, in passing sentence, the judge had given insufficient credit for the appellant's previous good character and guilty plea.

CA (Crim Div) (Mantell LJ, Henriques J, Judge Fawcus)
9 October 2000

The defendant successfully appealed against the imposition of a restriction order under s.41 Mental Health Act 1983 because s.37(2)(a) of the Act required a doctor giving evidence to provide the court with a reason to impose a restriction order.

CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Newman J, Rafferty J)
8 August 2000

A sentence of between four and five years' imprisonment was appropriate for an isolated incident of causing grievous bodily harm with intent on a baby, by a person of previous good character, which gave rise to an offence under s.18 Offences Against the Person Act 1861.

CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Newman J, Rafferty J)
8 August 2000

Three years' detention for a 16-year-old defendant was unduly lenient for an offence of causing grievous bodily harm with intent where the victim was extremely vulnerable and had been attacked in his own home with weapons in a prolonged attack. An appropriate sentence was at least five years' detention.

CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Holman J, Moses J)
10 July 2000

In a successful appeal against a conviction for one offence of unlawful wounding, the Court of Appeal held that a propensity direction was fundamental to the appellant's case. In the circumstances, the judge was wrong to have refused the appellant such a direction on the basis of a previous caution for shoplifting recorded when he was just 14 years old. Accordingly the conviction was deemed unsafe and was quashed.

CA (Crim Div) (Swinton Thomas LJ, Poole J, Tomlinson J)
13 June 2000

Appeal against a total sentence of four years and nine months' imprisonment. Whilst the offences of inflicting grievous bodily harm and wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm were serious assaults, in view of the appellant's previous good character and demonstration of remorse there was no need for him to serve as a long-term prisoner. Accordingly the sentence was quashed and substituted with a term of three years and nine months' imprisonment.

CA (Crim Div) (Penry-Davey J, Judge Fabyan Evans)
23 May 2000

In an appeal against a sentence of 14 years' imprisonment for offences of attempted murder, wounding with intent and affray, in the absence of any substantial mitigating features, the Court of Appeal was of the opinion that the sentence could not be regarded as manifestly excessive, particularly in view of the fact that one of the appellant's victims was fortunate not to have died.

CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Ian Kennedy J, Hallett J)
8 May 2000

The sentence in this case of three years' imprisonment for an offence of assault causing grievous bodily harm with intent was unduly lenient. Having regard to the element of double jeopardy, the sentence was quashed and substituted with a term of five years' imprisonment.

CA (Crim Div) (Roch LJ, Smith J, Moore-Bick J)
18 April 2000

A sentence of two years' imprisonment for an offence of wounding with intent on a contested case was regarded as unduly lenient in view of the fact that the offender had several similar previous convictions and had a poor long-term prognosis for behavioural improvement. Accordingly, the sentence was quashed and substituted with a term of three-and-a-half years' imprisonment.

CA (Crim Div) (Wright J, Judge Colston QC)
24 March 2000

In an appeal against a total sentence of three years and ten months' imprisonment for offences of criminal damage, threatening behaviour, unlawful wounding and assault occasioning actual bodily harm, whilst the individual sentences for each offence were not manifestly excessive, the totality was too long and accordingly, by ordering concurrent sentences on specific offences, the total sentence was reduced, resulting in a term of two years and ten months' imprisonment.

CA (Crim Div) (Roch LJ, Judge Brian Walsh QC)
25 February 2000

A sentence of five years' imprisonment for an offence of wounding with intent would normally have been unappealable in usual circumstances. However, because nobody, including the appellant and the sentencing judge, was aware that the appellant was pregnant at the time of the trial, the Court of Appeal would exercise its spirit of mercy in the interests of the baby, and reduce the overall sentence to a term of three years and nine months' imprisonment, thereby enabling the appellant to be released after 18 months in order to continue looking after her baby.

CA (Crim Div) (Rose LJ, Latham J, Holman J)
24 January 2000

The appellant had failed to establish evidence that he had acted in self-defence. However, the sentence of four years' detention for an offence of unlawful wounding was reduced to three years.

CA (Crim Div) (Beldam LJ, Dyson J, Richards J)
13 January 2000

A four-and-a-half-year sentence for offences of aggravated burglary with intent to cause grievous bodily harm and attempted aggravated burglary with intent to cause grievous bodily harm was regarded as significantly too long, having had regard to related authorities, and was reduced to a term of two and a half years' imprisonment.

CA (Crim Div) (Mantell LJ, Turner J, Judge Richard Gibbs QC)
3 December 1999

An appeal against a conviction for unlawful wounding was allowed because the trial judge refused to leave the issue of self-defence to the jury when accident was the pleaded defence.

CA (Crim Div) (Waller LJ, Kay J, Judge Hyam)
1 February 1999

Where there was no issue on the evidence before the jury that the defendant was asserting self-induced intoxication in relation to an offence of specific intent, a fortiori where the defendant was running self-defence on a charge of wounding with intent, there was no necessity for the judge to give any direction as to drunkenness.

CA (Crim Div) (Sedley J, Hughes J)
19 October 1998

A sentence of ten years' imprisonment for causing grievous bodily harm with intent and wounding with intent to do grievous bodily harm was not manifestly excessive as the crimes merited a severe sentence and had caused a permanent disability to one of the victims.

Scroll to top