Okang, R v [2021] EWCA Crim 654

WARNING: reporting restrictions may apply to the contents transcribed in this document, particularly if the case concerned a sexual offence or involved a child. Reporting restrictions prohibit the publication of the applicable information to the public or any section of the public, in writing, in a broadcast or by means of the internet, including social media. Anyone who receives a copy of this transcript is responsible in law for making sure that applicable restrictions are not breached. A person who breaches a reporting restriction is liable to a fine and/or imprisonment. For guidance on whether reporting restrictions apply, and to what information, ask at the court office or take legal advice.This Transcript is Crown Copyright. It may not be reproduced in whole or in part other than in accordance with relevant licence or with the express consent of the Authority. All rights are reserved.[2021] EWCA Crim 654Case No 202100171/A1
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Venue Royal Courts of JusticeDate Wednesday 17 February 2021
Strand
London
WC2A 2LL
LORD JUSTICE HOLROYDEMR JUSTICE LAVENDERMRS JUSTICE ELLENBOGEN DBEREGINACrownVDENIS OKANG__________Computer Aided Transcript of Epiq Europe Ltd,Lower Ground, 18-22 Furnival Street, London EC4A 1JSTel No: 020 7404 1400; Email: rcj@epiqglobal.co.uk (Official Shorthand Writers to the Court)_________MR A KING appeared for Appellant_________J U D G M E N T
[1]appellant pleaded guilty on 9 November 2020.[2]sleep, suffering from anxiety attacks, high blood pressure and losing weight.[3]Mr Durston's business. The sole issue on this appeal is whether the sentences should have been suspended. The judge took the view that the offending was so serious that appropriate punishment could only be achieved by immediate custody. That is, of course, one of the factors indicating that it would not be appropriate to suspend a custodial sentence, as set out in the guideline on Imposition of Community and Custodial Sentences. However, it is submitted on behalf of the appellant that all three of the factors indicating that it may be appropriate to suspend a custodial sentence were present in this case.[4]while she was at work or university and supported her during her bouts of depression.[5]victims.[6]immediate custody would result in significant harmful impact upon others.[7]to impose an immediate sentence of imprisonment.[8]over £14,000 of it on goods for himself.[9]custody. Accordingly, we dismiss this appeal. Epiq Europe Ltd hereby certify that the above is an accurate and complete record of the proceedings or part thereof. Lower Ground, 18-22 Furnival Street, London EC4A 1JS Tel No: 020 7404 1400 Email: rcj@epiqglobal.co.uk