Thom is frequently instructed to advise and appear in the Court of Appeal and High Court on appeals from the lower courts. He has experience of appeals against conviction, sentence and matters arising out of confiscation proceedings.
He has particular expertise in advising on the complex issues which often arise with the imposition of life sentences and sentences of Imprisonment for Public Protection ("IPP"). Thom also has experience of responding in cases where the Attorney General refers a sentence to the Court of Appeal as 'unduly lenient', under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988.
R v Ward  EWCA Crim 1464 (link)
Appeal against conviction for historic child sexual offences on the basis of the judge's failure to exclude the evidence of a confession made to an appropriate adult at the police station. Appeal against the subsequent compensation order made in respect of the complainant.
R v Rabani  EWCA Crim 1192
An appeal against an extended sentence of 24 years, imposed for a second offence of rape.
R v O'Hagan  EWCA Crim 272 (link)
Successful appeal against a sentence imposed for serious and repeated breaches of a restraining order.
R v Manders  1 Cr App R (S) 11 (link)
Appeal against a mandatory minimum five year sentence, imposed under firearms legislation for possession of a stun gun disguised as an iPhone. The court noted Thom's "clear and focused submissions".
R v Phillips  EWCA Crim 624 (link)
Successful appeal against a sentence of Imprisonment for Public Protection ("IPP"), brought eight years after the sentence was imposed.
R v Roberts and others  1 WLR 3249;  2 Cr App R (S) 14 (link)
Represented one of the appellants in a conjoined appeal before the Lord Chief Justice and a specially convened Court of Appeal to provide guidance as to the question of appeals brought out of time. Commentary on the case can be found in Criminal Law Review at Crim. L.R. 2016, 7, 510-512.
R v Shaheen  EWCA Crim 2190 (link)
Appeal against sentence in a wounding where a security guard had been attacked with a knife. Foskett J noted, "Mr Thom Dyke, who appeared before the judge and before us [and] for whose helpful submissions we express our gratitude" (§20).
R v D  1 Cr App R (S) 23 (link)
Appeared for the appellant who had received an extended sentence of 19 years' imprisonment for child sex offences. The appeal raised an important issue of whether a sentencing judge had inherent jurisdiction to vary a sentence outside of the time limit imposed under section 155 of the Powers of Criminal Courts (Sentencing) Act 2000. Commentary on the case can be found in Criminal Law Review at Crim. L.R. 2015, 3, 227-228 and it is cited in Archbold (2016) at 5–1293.
R v Dodd  EWCA Crim 2296 (link)
Appeal against conviction for a section 18 GBH. The appeal was brought on the basis that trial counsel had failed to advise properly on a plea to an alternative count, and that as a result the appellant had been denied the opportunity to advance self-defence at trial.
Attorney General’s Reference No. 80 of 2013  EWCA Crim 342 (link)
Appeared for the respondent in an appeal brought by the Attorney General in the case of an offender convicted of multiple counts of extremely serious sexual assaults against his stepdaughter.
R v Lewis  1 WLR 2027;  1 Cr App R 25 (link)
Appeal against conviction based on a point of jurisdiction under section 40 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988. The Court of Appeal noted in their judgment, “Mr Dyke has argued that dry issue of law on paper and orally with fortitude and skill”. The case is cited in Archbold (2016) at 1-134.
R v Barrett  EWCA Crim 2583 (link)
Appeal against sentence in the case of a burglar who sexually assaulted a 12-year-old girl. The Court of Appeal praised Thom’s “detailed written submissions, supported in commendably clear and focused submissions.”
R v Power  EWCA Crim 2374 (link)
Successful appeal against sentence in a £30,000 benefit fraud. Custodial sentence quashed and replaced with a suspended sentence with 40 hours unpaid work.
R v Wroblewski  EWCA Crim 2093 (link)
Successful appeal against sentence in case involving the evasion of £200,000 of excise duty.