[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> England and Wales Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) Decisions >> Sheller, R v [2009] EWCA Crim 2115 (15 October 2009) URL: http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2009/2115.html Cite as: [2010] 1 Cr App R (S) 107, [2009] EWCA Crim 2115, [2010] 1 Cr App Rep (S) 107

[New search] [Printable RTF version] [Help]

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
CRIMINAL DIVISION

		Royal Courts of Justice The Strand London WC2A 2LL
		15 October 2009

Thursday 15 October 2009

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE: I shall ask Mr Justice Penry-Davey to give the judgment of the court.

MR JUSTICE PENRY-DAVEY:

1. On 14 October 2008, in the Crown Court at Maidstone, the appellant pleaded guilty to robbery. On 9 April 2009 he was sentenced to six years' imprisonment, with a direction that 256 days spent in custody on remand should count towards sentence. He appeals against sentence by leave of the single judge.
2. The robbery occurred in the early morning of 18 July 2008 when Miss Savage, a supervisor at the Co-op retail services in Folkestone, unlocked the premises and went in. A short while later another employee, Mr Woolnough, arrived. He left the back doors insecure because the arrival of a cleaner, Miss Peers, was expected imminently. Before she arrived, three or four masked men, including the appellant, entered the premises through that door. They were all armed with knives. One of them approached Miss Savage and forced her to open the safes after threatening her with a knife. £10,000 in cash, about £1,000 worth of postage stamps and gift vouchers, a large quantity of scratch cards and about £1,000 worth of cigarettes were stolen. Mr Woolnough was tied up by the appellant using the belt from his trousers. He was locked in a bond room off the warehouse. At some point during the robbery Miss Peers arrived. When she was forced to the ground she said that she had a heart condition. One of the robbers showed her some consideration before she was taken to the bond room and locked in there with Mr Woolnough. Miss Savage was then locked in the same room before the robbers left.
3. A delivery driver subsequently found the three of them in the bond room and released them. A knife was recovered from the scene and the appellant's DNA was found on it.
4. The appellant was subsequently arrested. When interviewed he eventually admitted that he had taken part in the robbery but declined to name the others. He said that the robbery had been planned four hours beforehand, that he was due to be given a share of the proceeds but in the end he had, in fact, received nothing. He admitted that the images found on the CCTV footage were of him and claimed that he had been the one who had shown compassion to Miss Peers.
5. The sentencing judge pointed out the aggravating features of disguise engendering more fear and intimidation, the robbers being armed with knives, and the fact that there were several of them. One of the assistants had been restrained in a most degrading way, and all three members of staff were left locked in a room. It was clear that there was a degree of pre-planning.
6. It is argued in concise and competent submissions by Miss Oragwu on behalf of the appellant that this was a level 2 robbery within the categories set out in the Sentencing Guidelines Council's guidelines, involving the use of a weapon to threaten, and/or significant force, which called for a starting point of four years and a sentencing range from two years to seven years. On the appellant's behalf reliance was placed in mitigation on his guilty plea and on his remorse. It was pointed out that in the hours leading up to the incident he had consumed a large quantity of alcohol, ecstasy and diazepam, having relapsed after being drug-free for some time. It was suggested that he had shown a degree of compassion with the shop staff, that in the event no actual physical harm was caused, and that the offence was carried out in an unsophisticated way. Although he had convictions, he had none for robbery. He had not previously served a custodial sentence, and many spoke positively about him. Having regard to all those matters and on that basis, it is suggested that the sentence was too long.
7. Although this offence was broadly within the category of a level 2 robbery there were, as the judge pointed out, additional aggravating factors: several men were involved; the staff were restrained and locked up; the offence was pre-planned; disguises were worn; and clearly the premises were targeted as likely to carry large sums of money.
8. In our judgment, this was a severe sentence but justifiably so. It was neither manifestly excessive nor wrong in principle. The appeal against sentence is accordingly dismissed.