Rex v Tyler John Hunt – Court of Appeal – [2024] EWCA Crim 629 – Case Summary

Relevant for:

Criminal law practitioners, appellate lawyers

This case concerned an appeal by Tyler John Hunt against the minimum term of his sentence for murder, which was dismissed by the Court of Appeal.

TLDR:

• Tyler Hunt was convicted of murder and sentenced to a minimum term of 18 years and 63 days.
• Hunt appealed against the sentence, arguing it was unjust due to disparity with his co-accused's sentence.
• The Court of Appeal dismissed the appeal, upholding the original sentence.
• The court emphasized the statutory framework provided by paragraph 5A of Schedule 21 of the Sentencing Code.

Tyler John Hunt was convicted of murder on 30 November 2023 in the Crown Court at Bristol. Born on 20 June 2005, Hunt had previously pleaded guilty to having an article with a blade or point. His co-accused, referred to as 'D' due to a section 45 order, was also convicted of murder. Hunt was sentenced to be detained at His Majesty's Pleasure with a minimum term of 18 years and 63 days. No separate penalty was imposed for the offence of having a bladed article. Hunt's application for leave to appeal against the sentence was referred to the full court by the Registrar, and leave was granted.

On 4 December 2022, Hunt and D, both dressed in black and wearing balaclavas, rode borrowed e-bikes to a shopping park in Swindon. Each carried an 18-inch machete. After riding around for about 40 minutes, they encountered Owen Dunn, an 18-year-old male, near a children's playground. Hunt and D did not know Dunn, and Dunn did not know them. As Dunn approached on his bicycle, Hunt and D got off their e-bikes and confronted him. D stabbed Dunn with his machete, causing catastrophic injuries that led to Dunn's death within minutes.

Hunt and D fled the scene, abandoning their e-bikes and disposing of the machetes. Hunt was arrested on 7 March 2023, tracked by an electronic tag he was wearing at the time. Initially denying involvement, Hunt later claimed self-defense, which the trial judge rejected. Hunt had a history of minor violent offences and was on bail for threatening behaviour at the time of the murder. D had no previous court appearances.

The sentencing judge considered victim personal statements and reports on both Hunt and D. Hunt had a troubled background, including a difficult childhood with a single mother struggling with alcohol and mental health issues. D came from a supportive family and had made educational progress while on remand. The judge applied paragraph 5A of Schedule 21 of the Sentencing Code, determining starting points for the minimum terms based on their ages at the time of the offence. Hunt's starting point was 23 years, reduced to 19 years due to mitigating factors. D's starting point was 13 years, reduced to 12 years due to his progress on remand.

Hunt's appeal argued that the disparity in sentences between him and D led to injustice. The Court of Appeal, referencing previous cases and the statutory framework, found no error in the sentencing judge's approach. The court emphasized that the judge had balanced the different factors to achieve a just result within the statutory provisions. The appeal was dismissed, and Hunt's sentence was upheld.

Legal representatives: Miss S Jones KC for the Applicant, Mr M Burrows KC for the Crown

Judicial Panel: Lord Justice William Davis, Mrs Justice Cheema-Grubb DBE, His Honour Judge Dennis Watson KC

Case Citation Reference: [2024] EWCA Crim 629