A 'COWARDLY' drug addict who terrorised a pensioner in her own home with a claw hammer has failed to convince top judges to reduce his sentence.

Michael Daniel Jeffrey, 24, ambushed the woman in the garden of her Cheltenham home, holding the hammer above his head, before chasing her inside when she tried to escape.

There was then a struggle inside, with Jeffrey taking the victim's purse and the keys from the inside of her door.

As he tried to flee, he slammed the door behind him – trapping the woman's arm and causing her extreme pain.

Taking advantage of the injury he had caused, and the woman's temporary disability, Jeffrey then locked the door behind him and made off.

He admitted robbery at Gloucester Crown Court in November last year, as well as separate offences of burglary and possessing heroin.

Jeffrey, of Wheatland Drive, Cheltenham, asked for four further burglaries, one attempted burglary and a theft from a motor vehicle to be taken into consideration and was jailed for five-and-a-half years.

Mr Justice Maddison, who heard Jeffrey's bid to win time off his sentence, told London's Criminal Appeal Court the burglary took place just two weeks after he robbed the woman, who is in her 60s.

The victims of that raid had two computers, a purse and two cameras stolen – losing all of their wedding photos.

The heroin possession offence happened in August 2009, when two plain clothes police officers spotted Jeffrey acting suspiciously in Cheltenham town centre. They followed him down an alleyway, where he tried to throw away a clingfilm wrap of the drug. He was arrested and released on bail.

Mr Justice Maddison, who sat alongside Lord Justice Pitchford and Mr Justice Macduff, accepted Jeffrey had only taken the hammer with him so he could use it to break into the house and had no intention to injure the woman.

He said there was "some merit" in the argument the robbery sentence in particular should have been shorter.

However, he concluded: "There were a significant number of aggravating features, not the least of which was the persistence with which this offence was committed.

"Undeterred by his initial confrontation with the complainant, Jeffrey followed her.

"In our view, the judge was right to say that the court should do what they properly can do to deter cowardly offences of this kind. We have concluded the total sentence of five-and-a-half years for all of these offences cannot be described as manifestly excessive, severe though the sentences were."