Sentencing Where Offending Began as a Juvenile but Continued into Adulthood
When a period of offending begins when a client is a youth and continues into adulthood, sentencing becomes a complicated exercise. Courts need to balance the principles of youth sentencing with adult sentence guidelines.
There are a number of key cases in which the Court of Appeal have set out the approach which should be taken when sentencing in these circumstances.
R v Ahmed [2023] EWCA Crim 281:
- Sentencing guidelines for children remain relevant even when offenders are now adults.
- The starting point for sentence should be the sentence a youth would have received if a client was sentenced as a youth.
- A custodial sentence can’t exceed the maximum available to a juvenile, unless there’s a good reason. The court of appeal made clear that merely reaching 18 isn’t enough.
R v Clarke [2018] EWCA Crim 185:
- Reaching the age of 18 is “no cliff edge”.
- Reaching maturity continues after the age of 18 and courts must take account for this reality.
Defence Practice
When dealing with sentences where clients were youths at any time during the offending period, a defence team should:
- Submit to the court a detailed sentence note making clear representations backed up by the relevant case law.
- Provide the court with a clear timeline evidencing when offending began and continued,
- Mitigation centred on vulnerability, exploitation, mental health, development and maturity.
Sentencing offenders whose criminality began in youth and continued into adulthood demands careful and detailed consideration. R v Ahmed is now the guiding authority, supported by Clarke and Parkes as outlined above.
In cases like these it is critical to have a legal team who understand the law in this area and are able to make strong representations and provide expert representation to work towards the best possible sentence.