Sentence for aggravated burglary reduced where co-accused treated more leniently

Birmingham P: Criminal Law – appeal against severity of sentence – aggravated burglary – criminal damage – seven years’ imprisonment with final eighteen months suspended – concurrent sentence of two and a half years’ imprisonment and two years’ imprisonment – injured party’s front door was smashed by bricks – appellant and co-accused seen smashing a car with steel bars – car belonged to another injured party – aggravated burglary is a separate incident – appellant smashed windows of a different injured party and barged into the kitchen and living room – appellant knocked that injured party to the ground causing injury to the injured party’s elbow and shin – whether the headline sentence identified was unduly harsh – whether sentencing judge failed to strike a balance between aggravating and mitigating sentences – offences of real seriousness – sentence could not be seen as severe – sentence regarded as falling well within judge’s discretion – extent of divergence between sentence of co-accused and appellant gives rise to a degree of disquiet – effective sentence reduced to four and a half years and six years accordingly – appeal allowed.