An 18-year-old man jailed for smashing a restaurant window during the summer riots is to be freed after successfully appealing his sentence.
Dylan Willis, 18, who admitted violent disorder after repeatedly smashing a Middlesbrough restaurant window with a brick, had his 14 month sentence suspended for two years by Court of Appeal judges.
The panel of three senior judges said Willis’ complex developmental and mental health background should have been taken into account.
Appeals on behalf of three other men – part of the first attempts to challenge riot sentences – failed to have their sentences cut.
Willis, from Hartlepool, will now be freed immediately.
The panel of three senior judges said Willis’ health meant he should have received a suspended sentence.
The teenager, watching via a video link from HMP Holme House, appeared emotional as it was confirmed he would be freed.
The judges said that they had reached the “difficult decision” of changing his term to a suspended sentence because of his specific background.
Mr Justice Bennathan said that there had been clear evidence that Willis had ADHD and a low IQ.
These factors, as well as his autism spectrum disorder, had all affected his decision making, he said.
The Court of Appeal said it would not alter the length of the sentences of three other men, saying they had been appropriate.
Paul Williams, 45, remains in jail serving a two year and two month sentence.
He was jailed in August when he threw metal fencing and a can of beer at police after goading officers during rioting in Sunderland on 2 August.
Ozzie Cush, 20, from Reading, will continue to serve a 10 month sentence after he assaulted an emergency worker after kicking a police officer during a central London protest.
Meanwhile, the Court of Appeal changed Aminadab Temesgen’s sentence from one in prison to one in a Young Offenders’ Institution due to an error in how he had been originally sentenced. It remains the same length at 14 months.
Dame Sue Carr, the Lady Chief Justice, said that offenders who threatened the safety and wellbeing of communities by taking part in the nationwide rioting had to expect severe sentences that would not only punish them but deter others.
“There is an overwhelming obligation on sentencing courts to do what they can to ensure the protection of the public, whether in their homes or in their businesses or in the street and to protect the homes and businesses and the streets in which they live and work,” she said.
“Those who deliberately participate in disturbances of this magnitude, causing injury and damage and fear to even the most stout-hearted of citizens, and who individually commit further crimes during the course of the riots are committing aggravated crimes.
“They must be punished accordingly, and the sentences should be designed to deter others from similar criminal activity.”
She added that while offenders had to be sentenced for their individual crimes, the courts must also look at the bigger picture and the effect their actions has on speading fear among the public.
