Factual and Procedural Background
The Appellant, aged 45, pleaded guilty at the first opportunity and was sentenced in the Crown Court in The City on 25 November 2025 to a total of 51 months’ imprisonment for multiple offences; he appealed sentence with the limited leave of the single judge. [Para 26]
The offending involved, first, the theft of railway cabling on 7 February 2025, when the Appellant was seen on the railway track and police later found cable-cutting and burning equipment nearby; second, the theft of a vehicle and two attempted or completed retail burglaries in early May 2025; and third, a further burglary at a residential building in August 2025. [Para 28][Para 30][Para 33][Para 35][Para 36][Para 39][Para 40][Para 41][Para 42]
Legal Issues Presented
- Whether the overall sentence was manifestly excessive, including whether the lead offence of railway cable theft had been wrongly categorised for harm and culpability. [Para 49][Para 54][Para 69][Para 74]
- Whether the written basis of plea should have been taken into account at sentence, particularly on harm and culpability for the cable theft. [Para 56][Para 60][Para 62][Para 63]
Arguments of the Parties
Appellant's Arguments
- The Appellant argued that the sentence was manifestly excessive, advancing points on categorisation and mitigation. [Para 49]
- He relied on a written basis of plea stating that he had taken two lengths of loose cable from builders’ bags rather than cutting and stealing it, that the £26,000 replacement cost was not accepted, and that the cable itself was worth £1,312.50. [Para 57][Para 58][Para 59]
Table of Precedents Cited
| Precedent |
Rule or Principle Cited For |
Application by the Court |
| Newton |
If a defendant pleads guilty on a basis of plea, the Crown and court must consider whether it is accepted; if not, a Newton hearing may be required, and if accepted the defendant is sentenced on the agreed basis. [Para 62] |
The court restated this principle, then examined the Appellant’s basis of plea and held that it made no difference to sentence. [Para 62][Para 63][Para 65][Para 71] |
Court's Reasoning and Analysis
The sentencing judge treated the railway cable theft as category 1 harm and category A culpability, identified a guideline starting point of 3½ years with a range of 2½ to 6 years, moved to a notional 4-year term because of antecedent history, increased that to 6 years to reflect the remaining offences, and then reduced it to 4 years for full guilty plea credit. [Para 44][Para 45]
The court agreed that, even if the lead offence had been placed in a lower harm category, the overall sentence would still not have been manifestly excessive because the 4-year notional term was justified and the 2-year uplift for the other offending was generous. [Para 51][Para 53][Para 54]
On harm, the court held that the Appellant’s mere non-acceptance of the £26,000 replacement figure, without any alternative valuation or detailed critique, would not have changed the judge’s assessment. [Para 65]
The court also rejected the suggestion that the basis of plea undermined culpability: the Appellant had been found burning the cable to remove identification markings, with tools present to facilitate cutting and burning, and the offending involved significant planning and group activity. [Para 71][Para 73]
The court further said that railway cable theft will ordinarily involve significant additional harm, because it inconveniences the public and deters use of rail travel, and that deliberate targeting of railways supports culpability A because railways are particularly vulnerable. [Para 69][Para 74]
Accordingly, the court concluded that the basis of plea made no difference to the sentencing exercise and that the sentence could not be described as manifestly excessive. [Para 76]
Holding and Implications
DISMISSED. The appeal against sentence failed, so the Appellant’s sentence remained unchanged, including the activation of the suspended sentence term; the court did not identify any new precedent and applied established sentencing principles to the facts before it. [Para 78][Para 47][Para 76]