McElroy, R (on the application of) v Lewes Combined Court

J U D G M E N T

1. LORD JUSTICE ELIAS: The claimant was convicted at Eastbourne Magistrates' Court on 24 October 2013 of assault by beating and criminal damage. He was sentenced to a community order. He appealed that conviction to the Lewes Crown Court. The matter was reheard on 19 to 21 May 2014. The appeal was dismissed. He was sentenced by the Crown Court to 6 months' imprisonment for the battery charge and 7 days' imprisonment to run concurrently for the criminal damage offence.

2. He now seeks to challenge the sentence of the Crown Court by way of judicial review. In essence, he submits that the sentence clearly falls so far outside of the broad area of the court's discretion that it ought to be quashed.

3. The factual background can be briefly summarised. On the evening of 27 May 2012 the appellant had an argument with the complainant. She was a woman with whom he had been friendly and he was sharing a chalet with her for the weekend at a holiday park in Sussex. During the argument the applicant pushed Miss Reynolds against a wall and held her by her throat. Later she said she was lifted from the floor in this way. He squeezed her throat with one hand. He then dragged her by her shoulders to the first floor outside. He threw her bag over the balcony to a small grass patch below. He damaged some of her property, in particular a telephone which was worth some £28 and had been brought earlier that weekend. He then grabbed her throat and pushed her backwards over the railings on to the balcony. He threatened to throw her over. She was in fear that that is what he would do. Two members of the public intervened to separate the applicant from the complainant. The reason for the attack, according to the complainant, was that she did not want a sexual relationship to continue.

4. The issue, essentially, for the court was whether these offences had been committed; the applicant denied that they had.

5. In sentencing, the court had regard to the guidelines. These are sentencing guidelines for offences of this nature laid down by the Sentencing Guidelines Council. There are three categories. First, where there is greater harm having regard to the nature of the offence and higher culpability. Greater harm arises where there is injury or fear of injury. That is category one. Category two is where there is either greater harm and lesser culpability or lesser harm and greater culpability and category three is where there is lesser harm and lesser culpabili