Carla Campbell v. Her Majesty’s Advocate [2019] HCJAC 6

Note of appeal against sentence:- On 1 October 2018, at a trial diet at Greenock Sheriff Court, the appellant pled guilty on indictment to a charge of assault and robbery to the severe injury of the complainer. The sheriff made an order in terms of section 16 of the Prisoners and Criminal Proceedings (Scotland) Act 1993 returning the appellant to custody for 8 months in relation to an unexpired portion of a sentence. Thereafter, the sheriff imposed a headline sentence of 42 months reduced by 4 months on account of the plea of guilty, and then reduced further by 9 months to reflect her period on remand, resulting in a custodial sentence of 29 months which was ordered to commence on the expiry of the section 16 order. The appellant appealed against the sentence imposed on the grounds that it was excessive. In particular, it was contended that the starting point of 42 months was excessive having regard to the nature of the offence and the appellant’s history of offending. It was submitted on behalf of the appellant that, whilst the charge included an averment of severe injury as a result of the complainer being repeatedly struck on the head and body with a brick, there was no permanent disfigurement or impairment libelled and the headline sentence selected was at a level where one might expect to see such aggravations. In relation to the appellant’s previous convictions she did have two previous convictions for assault, however, one resulted in a non-custodial sentence whilst the other in 2017 led to a sentence of 18 months imprisonment, and, in all of the circumstances, a starting point of 42 months was excessive. Here the court allowed the appeal against sentence. The court observed that whilst the sheriff had described the appellant in his report to the court as a dangerous individual there were certain errors in the sheriff’s report, for example, the assault in 2017 did not relate to the same complainer as reported by the sheriff, nor was the appellant on bail. In light of these factual errors the court considered that a headline sentence of 3 years imprisonment was appropriate given that this was the appellant’s third conviction for assault to severe injury, including the robbery element in the present charge. The headline sentence was reduced by 9 months to reflect the time spent on remand which period of 27 months was discounted by approximately the same percentage as the sheriff to 24 months imprisonment to commence after the completion of the section 16 order period of which no exception had been taken.