GOING DOWN - Credit For Guilty Pleas

With significant changes proposed to the way judges and magistrates calculate credit for guilty pleas, this episode examines current practice, Court of Appeal guidance and potential reforms, with the practical realities faced by those advising clients at the coal face.

Retired solicitor (now barrister - non practising) Colin Beaumont and barrister Clive Smith explore the Sentencing Council’s Reduction in Sentence for a Guilty Plea guidelines, the key Court of Appeal judgments shaping current practice, and the impact of the Leveson Review’s recommendations. They tackle the nuances of “indicating willingness” to plead guilty, the effect of minimum sentence provisions, and the interplay between starting points and credit in both adult and youth cases.

The conversation also delves into strategic considerations: when a timely indication can mean the difference between custody and a community order, why the cases of Plaku, Hodgin, and Caley are essential reading for advocates, and how police station advice can influence sentencing outcomes months later. The hosts address the “perverse incentive” created by fee structures, discuss how credit can still be argued for late pleas that save significant court time, and highlight judicial flexibility in today’s backlogged system.

Closing with a look at the broader policy aims — encouraging genuine early pleas while safeguarding against wrongful admissions — this episode is an indispensable guide to understanding the subtleties of guilty plea credit and its application in practice.

LINKS:

The Leveson Review:

https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/media/686be85d81dd8f70f5de3c1f/35.49_MOJ_Ind_Review_Criminal_Courts_v8b_FINAL_WEB.pdf

Sentencing Council - June 2017 – 'Reduction in sentence for a guilty plea'

https://www.sentencingcouncil.org.uk/overarching-guides/magistrates-court/item/reduction-in-sentence-for-a-guilty-plea-first-hearing-on-or-after-1-june-2017/

Section 73 of the Sentencing Act 2020

https://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2020/17/section/73

R v Caley and Others [2012] EWCA Crim 2821

https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2012/2821.html&query=(caley)+AND+(2012)

R v Plaku, Plaku, Bourdon & Smith (2021) EWCA Crim 424

https://www.bailii.org/cgi-bin/format.cgi?doc=/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2021/568.html&query=(plaku)

Rex v Derie [2024] EWCA Crim 1337

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2024/1337.html

(The Court of Appeal considering the appropriate percentage reduction to reflect the age of the offender at the time of the commission date of the offence and also considering whether or not greater credit should have been given for the guilty plea)

Rex v Saunders [2024] EWCA Crim 1059

(The Court of Appeal looking at the issue of credit

where the defence held off the plea until they had obtained their own expert report in a back

calculation alcohol reading case)

Regina v Morrow [2021] EWCA Crim 574

(should the defendant have been afforded full credit when the charge of burglary

was not before the Court at the Magistrates’ Court stage)

Regina v Martin [2022] EWCA Crim 342

(the Court of Appeal confirming that 10% credit should have been afforded to a

defendant who pleaded guilty on the day of trial)

R v Morrisey [2021] EWCA Crim 1673

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2021/1673.html

(the Court of Appeal considering the appropriateness of a reduction in credit due to

the fact that the defendant was caught red-handed after a police chase!)

Paddon v Regina [2021] EWCA Crim 1485

https://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Crim/2021/1485.html

The issue of credit where psychiatric reports may be required in order to advise on plea

Regina v Nikoro [2021] EWCA Crim 1634

The percentage of credit available to a defendant who changes their plea during

the trial.

Regina v McQueen [2021] EWCA Crim 1303

The Court of Appeal restored full credit because the defendant had not had an opportunity to plead guilty to this earlier in the proceedings.

Regina v Sule [2021] EWCA Crim 1348

The Court of Appeal made the point, yet again, about a plea at the PTPH and credit of 25%.

Regina v RB JS and HG [2020] EWCA Crim 643

The correct approach when sentencing children or young people – find the appropriate relevant length of sentence for an adult – deduct whatever percentage should be deducted to reflect the youth of the offender and, as the final stage, deduct from that figure any reduction that needs to be made concerning credit for the stage at which the plea was indicated or taken.

R v Lee Hodgin [2020] EWCA Crim 1388

A case in which the Court of Appeal had to consider the issue of whether or not the Crown Court judge should have given full credit of one third rather than 25% where there had been an indication at the Magistrates’ Court that it was “likely” the defendant would plead guilty.

For more information or to book a place on a forthcoming course, please visit: legal-eagle training.com.

⸻

Chapters

00:25 – Introduction and context for proposed reforms

02:10 – The Leveson Review’s recommendations on credit percentages

04:12 – When “indicating willingness” starts the credit clock

06:51 – Minimum sentences and capped credit

13:49 – Key case law: Plaku, Hodgin, and Kayley

21:36 – Strategic plea decisions and real-world magistrates’ court issues

31:26 – Financial incentives and the legal aid gap

33:31 – Court of Appeal rulings on timely pleas and fitness to plead

36:34 – Indicating alternatives and plea negotiation at PTPH

45:47 – Youth sentencing guidelines and the correct calculation order

48:41 – Beyond the basics: reducing the starting point vs. credit

50:17 – Judicial flexibility, policy aims, and ethical considerations

⸻