Page 24 - tmp

of the amended orders would be announced with our reserved judgment. We have now
received that detail.
Bones
On April 7, Pilchers J. gave the following reasons for reducing the sentence of imprisonment
passed on Bones:
a. This 18-year-old appellant pleaded guilty to one count of dwelling house burglary and
one of the handing stolen goods in the Basingstoke Magistrates’ Court and was
committed to the Crown Court for sentence. On 17th December 2004 at the Crown Court
at Winchester he was sentenced to a total of three years’ custody and made subject to an
Anti-Social Behaviour Order for a period of five years to run from the date of his release.
b. The events of burglary were committed during the morning of 23rd October 2004 at an
unoccupied house in Basingstoke. The appellant and another entered through a kitchen
window and carried out an untidy search, stealing items to the value of £4,800, some of
which were of great sentiment value to the owner. When the appellant was arrested a
watch, which had been taken during the burglary was recovered from him.
c. There was another burglary the next day from a house in Basingstoke. When the appellant
was arrested, his home was searched and property from that burglary was recovered. He
admitted buying these items knowing they were stolen.
PART 5 © SWEET & MAXWELL
59,
Simon Cordell’s Skeleton Argument (2) Pdf
Page: 22
R. v DEAN BONES AND OTHERS
The appellant has a number of previous convictions. He was before the courts on six
occasions during 2002, 2003 and 2004 for offences involving vehicle crime, attempted
burglary, an offence of violence, handling stolen goods and using threatening behaviour. He
received a series of community orders and in respect of two of them he was in breach by
reason of these offences.
The judge heard evidence in addition to that which he found sufficient to make the ASBO as
we have indicated. That, as we have also indicated, will be considered in detail and in
principle on a later occasion.
For the purposes of today’s hearing, we deal simply with the custodial sentence. It is argued
by counsel that the sentence of three years was loo long following a very early plea of guilty.
Applying the principles contained in the well-known case of Mainerney we are satisfied that
this sentence for offences in respect of which early pleas had been entered is too long. Bear-
ing in mind the clear refusal of the appellant to comply with community orders, a sentence of
custody was inevitable.
However, the dwelling house burglary, although of quite high value and causing considerable
distress, fell into the category of an offence committed by a first-time burglar, albeit with
those two aggravating features. There was also the receiving of stolen goods which the
appellant must have known had come from a dwelling house burglary. The total sentence
appropriate for that offending, in our judgment, would be one of 18 months.
We therefore allow the appeal to the extent of reducing the sentences to 18 months and six
months concurrently. To that extent, as we say, the appeal in relation to the custodial term is
allowed.”
The ASBO was in the following form:
“The court found that
(i) The defendant had acted in an anti-social manner which caused or was likely to cause
harassment, alarm, or distress to one or more persons not of the same household as himself as
shown by:

Page 22 of 139