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.
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.
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.
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.
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)  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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.