Unsuccessful appeals against sentences for burglary and aggravated burglary. The sentencing judge rightly identified the appellant as a professional burglar, travelling into rural areas and targeting relatively isolated spots, and rightly reflected public concern about such offences.Appeal against sentences for burglary and aggravated burglary. The appellant ('W') pleaded guilty to various counts, including one of burglary of a dwelling-house, for which he was sentenced to six years' imprisonment, and one of aggravated burglary of a dwelling-house, for which he was sentenced to seven years' imprisonment. Those sentences were to be served concurrently along with all the other sentences. Therefore W's total sentence was for seven years' imprisonment. Both offences were committed by W and a co-accused, whom the sentencing judge said had to be described as professional burglars. W was a 27 year old heroin addict who had 12 previous convictions. The burglary offence was committed while the householder was out. The aggravated burglary was committed in the presence of the householder who was threatened with a screwdriver by W. Among other things, the sentencing judge discussed the seriousness of the offences, noted that they took place in the daytime and targeted premises in relatively isolated areas, and considered the effect of the offences on the victims and the community. On appeal W submitted that the sentencing judge took too high a starting point for the sentences and failed to give full credit for the guilty pleas.HELD: If either of the offences were taken in isolation, then bearing in mind the guidelines in R v McInerney & Anor (2002) EWCA Crim 3003, it would appear that the sentences were too high, more particularly on a plea. However, they were not isolated offences. The sentencing judge rightly identified W as a professional burglar, travelling into rural areas in three counties and targeting relatively isolated spots. It was right for the sentencing judge and the Court of Appeal to reflect public concern about such offences. The totality of the sentencing and the individual sentences on appeal were entirely correct.Appeal dismissed.
 EWCA Crim 2508