APPEAL COURT, HIGH COURT OF JUSTICIARY
 HCJAC 41
Lord Justice Clerk
OPINION OF THE COURT
delivered by LORD CARLOWAY, the LORD JUSTICE CLERK
APPEAL AGAINST SENTENCE
JORDAN LEE CHESSER
HER MAJESTY’S ADVOCATE
Appellant: CM Mitchell; Paterson Bell
Respondent: Carmichael AD; the Crown Agent
29 April 2015
 On 20 January 2015, at a First Diet in the Sheriff Court at Aberdeen, the appellant pled guilty to 14 charges. In summary, these were: (2) theft of fuel on 15 January 2014; (6), (8) and (12) reset of cars on 5, 6 and 9 February; (13) dangerous driving, principally by attempting to evade the police on 9 February; (14)-(16) driving on the same occasion with no insurance and no licence and committing a statutory breach of the peace, involving homophobic remarks towards the police; (18) allowing himself to be carried in a stolen car on 19 February; (20) driving a stolen car on 10 March; (23)-(25) driving with no licence, no insurance and failing to identify the driver of a car, in terms of a statutory requirement, on 11 March; and (27) a breach of the appellant’s bail curfew on 23 March.
 In relation to the custodial terms which the sheriff imposed, these were: 9 months (discounted from 12 for the early plea) cumulo on charges (6), (8) and (12); 12 months (16) on charge (13) (which the sheriff regarded at the most serious); 3 months (4) cumulo on charges (18) and (20); and a further 3 months (4) on charge (27). The sentences in respect of the various blocks of charges produced 27 months (which was discounted from 36). The sheriff admonished the appellant on charges (2) and (16) because he was conscious of the overall impact of consecutive sentences.
 In selecting the custodial periods, the sheriff noted that the appellant was young (being aged 17 at the time). He had no previous adult convictions, although the CJSWR recorded a history of offending going back to the age of 12 and including culpable and reckless fire raising, breach of the peace, road traffic offences, reset and housebreaking. On 1 September 2014, he had been made the subject of a Community Payback Order, involving supervision for 2 years and 160 hours unpaid work in the community, and a Restriction of Liberty Order. He had apparently been complying with the CPO. Prior to that, from April to September 2014, he had been in the Rossie Secure Unit. The CJSWR noted that the appellant was very immature. He had made comments to the effect that he wished to end his offending and become a plasterer.
 The ground of appeal is essentially that the overall period of detention, was excessive. In short, the court agrees with that fundamental submission, particularly given the age of the appellant. A headline sentence of 3 years in custody is too long for a person of the appellant’s years, even for this catalogue of repeated offending. For that reason, the court will reduce the overall effect in the following way. On charges (6), (8) and (12) it will substitute a sentence of 6 months (reduced from 9); on charge (13) it will substitute 6 months (9); on charges (18), (20) and (27) it will not interfere. The effect of this is that, in respect of the blocks of sentences imposed, these are 6, 6, 3 and 3 months. The total sentence is one of 18 months (reduced from 26).