Commission refers the IPP sentence of Aiden Maund to the Court of Appeal

The Criminal Cases Review Commission  (CCRC) has referred the sentence of Aiden Maund to the Court of Appeal.

Mr Maund, along with five co-defendants, was charged with conspiracy to rob in relation to three robberies which took place between the end of April and the middle of May 2010.

He pleaded guilty at Worcester Crown Court on 4th August  2011. The guilty plea was entered after the trial had begun.

Mr Maund was sentenced in December 2011 to imprisonment for public protection (IPP) with a minimum term of eight years’ imprisonment, less 515 days on remand. On the same day four of his co-defendants were also given IPP sentences. A sixth man received an IPP sentence on December 20th.

Mr Maund sought leave to appeal against his sentence but was refused in May 2012. He applied to the CCRC in March 2017.

Since Mr Maund’s attempt to appeal, two of his co-defendants have successfully appealed against their IPP sentences and seen them replaced with determinate sentences. In doing so the Court said:

We are concerned that, when sentencing the applicant, the Judge may well have considered the defendants as a group, assessing their dangerousness by reference to the nature of the robberies rather than considering them individually in the light of their different roles” (see note one).

Having considered the case in detail, the CCRC has decided to refer Mr Maund’s sentence for appeal. The referral is made on the basis that the factors that caused the Court of Appeal to replace IPPs with determinate sentences in the appeals of his co-defendants could arguably also apply in Mr Maund’s case and that there is therefore a real possibility that the Court would similarly amend his sentence.

Mr Maund has been represented in his application to the Commission by Purcell Parker Solicitors, 204-206 Corporation Street, Birmingham, B4 6QB.

Note one: Quoted from paragraph 35 of R v Murray & Ors [2012] EWCA Crim 2823)

This statement was issued by the Criminal Cases Review Commission. For further enquires call  0121 233 1473 or e-mail

Notes for editors

  1. The Commission is an independent body set up under the Criminal Appeal Act 1995. It is responsible for reviewing suspected and alleged miscarriages of criminal justice in England, Wales and Northern Ireland. It is based in Birmingham and is funded by the Ministry of Justice.
  1. There are currently 12 Commissioners who bring to the Commission considerable experience from a wide variety of backgrounds. Commissioners are appointed by the Queen on the recommendation of the Prime Minister in accordance with the Office for the Commissioner for Public Appointments’ Code of Practice.
  1. The Commission usually receives around 1,500 applications for reviews (convictions and/or sentences) each year.  Typically, around 3.5%, or one in 29, of all applications are referred to the appeal courts.
  1. The Commission considers whether, as a result of new evidence or argument, there is a real possibility that the conviction would not be upheld were a reference to be made.  New evidence or argument is argument or evidence which has not been raised during the trial or on appeal.  Applicants should usually have appealed first. A case can be referred in the absence of new evidence or argument or an earlier appeal only if there are “exceptional circumstances”.
  1. If a case is referred, it is then for the appeal court to decide whether the conviction is unsafe or the sentence unfair.