March 7, 2025
Sarah Hill Appointed Part-Time Criminal Law Lecturer at Bournemouth University
Back to News & Blog
Kevin Hill Deals with 4 Crown Court Sentence Hearings in a Day - Nobody Went to Prison
There has been a lot of press about the problems caused by the backlog of cases in the Crown Court. We took action after an unacceptable delay in resolving cases for our clients. We persuaded Bournemouth Crown Court to list four of our cases for sentence in one day. Kevin Hill more than rose to the challenge and expertly and admirably defended in all four cases. Not one of the clients received an immediate custodial sentence! Read this article to learn more...
What Were the Four Cases Kevin Hill Dealt With and How Did He Do It?
Our Kevin Hill represented four of Hill Twine Solicitors & Barristers’ clients at their sentence hearings at Bournemouth Crown Court on 17 February 2025. Between them, the clients had been convicted of the offences of making indecent images of children, grievous bodily harm, and intentional strangulation.
The Crown Court deals with the most serious criminal offences and, as such, the risk of a custodial sentence is high. This presents a challenging set of circumstances to a Criminal Defence advocate, who needs to ensure that the preparation for a sentence hearing is truly excellent. There are many elements to consider, for example, what the prosecution case is, what the defendant’s instructions are, what has happened in the case so far, what a pre-sentence report (PSR) and any expert reports say, what any character references say, etc. The defence advocate also needs to consider the Sentencing Guidelines, together with any relevant case law, to understand what the sentence starting point for the Crown Court judge will be. The advocate then needs to plan carefully the plea in mitigation, endeavouring to secure the best possible outcome for a defendant.
The day of a sentence hearing is challenging for all concerned. The Criminal Defence advocate will meet with the client, who is often very nervous and worried about what is about to happen. A skilled advocate will manage a client’s expectations, giving advice on what the sentence is likely to be. Sometimes this may be good news for a client, but for cases that have got to the Crown Court, most of the time it is bad news. The advocate may also engage with any of the client’s friends or family in attendance, who will also understandably be very anxious about the sentence hearing. The advocate will liaise with the prosecutor to discuss anything that needs to be covered prior to the sentence hearing starting (such as, agreeing how the case should be opened, seeking clarification on any ancillary orders sought etc). This can be particularly challenging in cases where there are interested prosecution witnesses present, such as the victim or a victim’s family. A skilled and expert advocate will be sensitive to this, whilst ensuring that the interests of the defendant are protected.
Then the advocate deals with the sentence hearing. This is not an easy task, especially when someone’s liberty is at stake. The advocate needs to argue persuasively. An excellent advocate will avoid irritating a Crown Court judge with unrealistic submissions on sentence, whilst putting forward cogent reasons why a client should receive the least onerous sentence in the circumstances.
It takes a truly exceptional and skilled advocate to manage the preparation, look after the clients, and do a brilliant job in court before the judge. We are extremely proud to have an advocate of this calibre in Kevin Hill
Doing all of this, and doing it well, is hard enough when there is only one case to think about. Kevin did all of this in four cases listed for sentence on the same day! It takes a truly exceptional and skilled advocate to manage the preparation, look after the clients, and do a brilliant job in court before the judge. We are extremely proud to have an advocate of this calibre in Kevin Hill. His meticulous preparation, time management skills, and extensive experience engaging with clients enabled Hill Twine Solicitors and Barristers to have four cases that had been dragging on for far too long finally resolved. The positive feedback he received afterwards shows how much this meant to our clients. One client wrote in to say, “I cannot stress how grateful I am for you, because of you I get to live my life and be able to be there for my family for that I will be forever grateful. Thank you so much“. Receiving feedback of this nature will always mean such a lot to us.
The Four Cases
Case 1
The first client had been prosecuted for three offences of making indecent images of children. Hill Twine was instructed at the start of the court proceedings on a privately paying basis. Kevin Hill represented the client at each stage. In the magistrates’ court, the client pleaded guilty to making 53 Category A images, 28 Category B images, and 167 Category C images. It is important to note that, although the offence is called ‘making indecent images’, our client downloaded the images from the Internet, he had not produced them in any way.
The maximum sentence in the magistrates’ court for these offences at the time was a total of 12 months imprisonment. The magistrates took their view that the case deserved greater punishment than they could give and committed the matter to the Crown Court for sentence. The maximum sentence in the Crown Court for each offence is 10 years’ imprisonment.
The Crown Court judge listened carefully to Kevin’s plea in mitigation for the client. Taking into account factors such as the client’s early guilty plea, the judge determined that it was not necessary to impose a custodial sentence. Instead, he sentenced our client to a three-year community order with three requirements. The purposes of the sentence were punishment and rehabilitation.
Case 2
The second client appeared before Poole Magistrates’ Court towards the end of 2024 for an offence of grievous bodily harm (also known as ‘wounding’), contrary to section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. He had not arranged for legal representation and was entitled to the assistance of the duty solicitor. Our Paul Bevan happened to be the court duty Solicitor on the day in question and he represented the client, who pleaded guilty at the first hearing. The client subsequently instructed Hill Twine Solicitors & Barristers on a privately paying basis.
As with case 1, the magistrates’ court took the view that the case deserved greater punishment than was available in that court (6 months imprisonment at the time of the first hearing in this case). This time, it was a District Judge dealing with the first hearing and she committed the matter to the Crown Court for sentence. The maximum sentence for the offence in the Crown Court is five years imprisonment.
Following the plea in mitigation advanced by Kevin, the Crown Court judge imposed an 18 month community order, requiring the client to undertake 180 hours of unpaid work (the maximum number of hours of unpaid work a court can impose is 300).
Case 3
This client had asked for the assistance of a duty solicitor when he had been arrested at the police station and, as Hill Twine was on duty on that occasion, he was allocated to us. The client was not eligible for legal aid in the magistrates’ court and privately funded Hill Twine Solicitors & Barristers to deal with the case. He was represented by Kevin Hill throughout the court proceedings, pleading guilty to an offence of intentional strangulation at the first hearing. Once again, the District Judge in the magistrates’ court was of the view that the client should be given greater punishment than she could give (6 months imprisonment at the time this case was heard) and committed the matter to Bournemouth Crown Court for sentence. The maximum sentence for the offence in the Crown Court is five years imprisonment.
Kevin addressed the Crown Court judge in full, providing him with the client’s character references and drawing his attention to the positive features in mitigation. The judge stated that the custody threshold was crossed, but, after hearing from Kevin, was satisfied that a community order would be sufficient punishment. He imposed an 18-month community order with a rehabilitative activity requirement for 15 sessions; a fine of £1,000 was imposed as the penal element of the sentence.
Case 4
Like the client in case 2, this client was prosecuted for an offence of grievous bodily harm (also known as ‘wounding’), contrary to section 20 of the Offences Against the Person Act 1861. He had been assisted at the police station by a different firm and wanted to instruct Hill Twine Solicitors & Barristers to deal with the court proceedings. As with the other clients, he was not eligible for legal aid in the magistrates’ court and instructed us on a privately paying basis.
The client was represented by our Anna Zeeva at the first hearing, when he entered a guilty plea. Once again, the District Judge committed the matter to the Crown Court for sentence on the basis that the client deserved more than the maximum sentence of six months imprisonment the magistrates’ court could give.
In his preparation, based on all of the information available, Kevin concluded that a custodial sentence was likely. He acknowledged this before the judge, reasoning that the judge would be more likely to be persuaded by his submissions on sentence if he thought they were realistic and well-informed. The client benefitted from Kevin’s extensive advocacy experience and the judge was persuaded not to impose an immediate term of imprisonment. The client instead received a suspended sentence, 34 weeks imprisonment suspended for 18 months.
What is the Crown Court Backlog of Cases?
The reason these four cases were listed for sentence on the same day was because of the problems with the backlog of cases in the Crown Court. Between them, the cases had been listed for a total of six sentence hearings (yes, six) before they were finally concluded on 17 February 2025. Each time the sentence hearing listed was taken out by the Crown Court because of lack of court time. Our Crown Court Team made efforts to get the cases listed again and again. Eventually, the Crown Court agreed to our suggestion that all the cases should be listed on a single day for Kevin to deal with back-to-back.
It is a truth universally acknowledged that there is backlog of cases in the Crown Court (although it is no better in the magistrates’ court1). Whether you are interested in the Criminal Justice System or not, there has been a lot of coverage about this significant problem in the press and you are likely to have some understanding of it. Outlets such as the BBC, Sky News, The Guardian, and the Evening Standard have all reported recently on the issue. For those who don’t know, the conventional wisdom is that the more quickly a criminal case can be dealt with, the better for everyone involved. However, the backlog in the Crown Court is at a record high and statistics published on 12 December 2024 show the outstanding Crown Court caseload has risen to 73,105 – nearly double the 38,000 seen before the pandemic.
Statistics published on 12 December 2024 show the outstanding Crown Court caseload has risen to 73,105 – nearly double the 38,000 seen before the pandemic
Although the Labour Government announced a review of the Crown Court backlog problem at the end of 2024 (and Parliament’s Public Accounts Committee heard oral evidence on 9 January 2025), it is not a new problem. In fact, the National Audit Office reported on the problem in 2021 and the Public Accounts Committee considered it in 2022, 2023, and was seeking written submissions by the end of May 2024 for a further report. Despite all of this attention, the situation is not getting better.
Whilst the current Government approaches the problem from a somewhat one-sided and narrow perspective, stating ‘the review will look at what more can be done to make sure criminals have their day in court, without delay, get the punishment they deserve, and keep our streets safe‘,2 we are acutely aware of the negative impact delays can have on our clients and their loved ones.
What Action Did Hill Twine Solicitors & Barristers Take?
As a specialist Criminal Defence firm of solicitors and barristers, we are experts in defending those accused of criminal offences. Whilst a Government, concerned about its popularity and vote-winning strategies, may look at things from a victim’s perspective, we are focused on the interests of our clients. Whilst we do not underestimate the impact delays in the Criminal Justice System can have on complainants and victims, we see first-hand everyday the impact those same delays have on defendants. Every day we take calls from our clients in prison, those on bail, and their family members, wanting to know why their case has been taken out of the Crown Court list and when it is likely to be heard. We do not underestimate the impact having criminal proceedings hanging over them has on the mental wellbeing of our clients and their loved ones.
We do not underestimate the impact having criminal proceedings hanging over them has on the mental wellbeing of our clients and their loved ones
As stated above, the four cases that Kevin Hill dealt with on 17 February 2025 had been listed for a total of six sentence hearings before they were finally concluded. Each time the sentence hearing was taken out by the Crown Court the day before the scheduled hearing because of lack of available court time. From the Defence’s perspective, this creates problems for our clients who need to ensure that they are available to attend each hearing. This is particularly problematic for those with work and/or childcare or other caring commitments. It creates additional pressures for our Crown Court Team who need to deal with late changes to the court lists, doing everything they can to notify the clients of changes to save wasted journeys to court. Our Crown Court Team made efforts again and again to get the cases listed, chasing the Crown Court for sentence hearing dates. Eventually, the Crown Court agreed to our suggestion that all the cases should be listed on a single day for Kevin to deal with back-to-back.
For our clients, as a result of expertise in criminal defence work, they finally got their matters resolved and none of them ended up with the immediate custodial sentence that the magistrates’ court thought they should get.
If you would like to instruct Hill Twine Solicitors & Barristers to deal with your case, please do not hesitate to contact us now.
If you have any questions or need advice