Appellant: J Keenan, Solicitor Advocate; Capital Defence Lawyers

Respondent: M. Hughes, A.D.; Crown Agent

18 August 2011

[1] The appellant, John William Doran, pled guilty at a first diet in the Sheriff Court at Paisley to a charge that on 24 February 2001 at Glasgow Road, Paisley, he had with him an article which had a blade or was sharply pointed, namely a knife, without reasonable excuse or lawful authority, contrary to the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995, section 49(1) as amended. He accepted that at the time the offence was committed he was subject to three bail orders. He was sentenced to 27 months detention discounted from 36 months in respect of the early plea. Six months of that 36 was attributable to the bail aggravations. He now appeals on the ground that the period imposed is excessive.

[2] In particular, Mr Keenan on his behalf, has drawn our attention to what he describes as the absence of a significant history of offending and to the absence of any previous custodial sentence. He also reminded us that the maximum sentence for the offence was 4 years and that the surrounding circumstances of this offence disclosed no other conduct beyond simple possession. There was no question of the weapon being actively displayed or anything being done with it. When the appellant was detained, he explained that he had been getting threats on Facebook and for that reason had bought the knife in Poundland "as they will come through my door". The knife, of which we have seen a photocopy, is described by the sheriff as being "12 inches long, with a blade 8 inches in length...unquestionably, a lethal weapon".

[3] Before the sheriff, and also before us, it was accepted on behalf of the appellant that a custodial sentence was inevitable. The challenge was restricted to the notional starting point of 36 months, or more accurately the 30 months related to the commission of the offence itself. In explaining why he chose the sentence he did, the sheriff points out in his report that time and time again sheriffs at Paisley endeavour to remind young men such as the appellant of the risks they run if caught in possession of a knife. A powerful blow with this weapon could easily have fatal consequences. The sheriff suggested that his reason for purchasing the knife could properly be regarded as an aggravation of the offence rather than any form of mitigation. We would wish to express our agreement with, and support for, the comments made by the sheriff on this occasion.

[4] Having regard to the nature of the weapon involved and the appellant's record of prior offending, which includes a contravention of section 47(1) of the Criminal Law (Consolidation) (Scotland) Act 1995 for which he was placed on probation, two convictions for assault to injury as recently as 2009 and 2010, and a number of other convictions demonstrating that he has learned little from the measures of leniency displayed towards him in the past, we consider that the sheriff was well entitled to select as his starting point the period of 36 months including 6 months in respect of the breaches of bail. We cannot in any respect fault his approach to sentence in this case and we shall therefore refuse the appeal.

Aud