SUPPLY NO 3 Volume 2
340.29 Joint purchase of drugs
R v Ghalghalj 2016 EWCA Crim 140, 1 Cr App R (S) 66 (p 494) D pleaded to supply. He was a heroin
addict who purchased some heroin and cocaine wraps with a fellow addict for personal use. He handed over
his friend’s share and was arrested. D had had 21 previous court appearances. In 1998 he had a robbery (8
years). He had two breaches of drug testing and treatment order imposed for shoplifting offences. He had
no prison sentence from 2007 and 2014. Until 2015 there was only one drug offence (class C). While
awaiting trial, he was fined for shoplifting and given a community order with a drug rehabilitation
requirement for drug possession. The pre-sentence report suggested a community order with a drug
rehabilitation requirement. Held. We don’t know the weight of drugs but we assume it was less than a gram
in all. His previous was less serious than the Judge said. It was a Category 4 not 3 offence. Because of the
offences on bail and his previous, a community order was not appropriate. We start at 18 months not 2
years. With plea, that’s 12 months. The current community order with drug rehabilitation requirement was
currently working, so we make it suspended with requirements.
340.45 Cannabis
Class B
Local dealer
Post-guideline case
R v Arslam 2016 EWCA Crim 321, 2 Cr App R (S) 8 (p 33) D pleaded to suppling 1.44 grams of cannabis.
An undercover officer, UO saw D in Church Road and said he wanted drugs. D referred him to C standing
nearby and the officer bought cannabis for £10. UO then asked D for a telephone number to buy cannabis
in the future. D supplied that and a mobile. The next day, UO used the number to arrange to buy cannabis.
D instructed him to go to Church Road and UO bought £20 worth of skunk cannabis. Nearly three weeks
later, police stopped C and another in Church Road and then found D in a nearby car with three mobile
phones, including the one with the number with which the undercover officer had been supplied with. D
also had £670 on him. He was arrested and bailed in respect of the events that day. Eight days later, UO
returned to Church Road to buy cannabis. He spoke to a co-offender and was told to wait. D arrived and
supplied a bag of cannabis to the co-offender. £20 of skunk cannabis was then sold to UO. D was aged 21
and had previous convictions including two for supplying cannabis, (first a suspended sentence and the
second seven months' detention in a YOI, public disorder and possession of an offensive weapon. The Judge
determined D was a ‘low level leader, if not he was a high significant role’. The range for a significant role
was 26 weeks to 3 years. The Judge gave D 4 years, (the same as for a leading role). The starting point of
four years is longer than an offence of supplying this amount of cannabis would generally warrant.
However, the judge's sentence was justified.
Note. The problem here is the charge. D could have been charged with being concerned in the supply of
cannabis covering the first to last day. This would enable all the offending to be reflected in the charge,
plus the inference that D was part of a retail outlet operating each or most days. Ed.
340.51 Cocaine/Heroin
Class A Significantly more than 5 kilos
R v Apostu 2016 EWCA Crim 1150 D pleaded (late but with full credit) to supplying cocaine and heroin.
There were two co-accused, M and W. M was observed collecting a VW Polo on a recovery truck and
driving from Northamptonshire to Gravesend where he stopped and called W who was in a nearby pub. W
left the pub, went to a Skoda parked in the car park, removed a suitcase and took it over to M’s truck. They
then both put the suitcase into the boot of the VW. M drove off and W returned to a nearby hotel. M was
stopped and in the suitcase police found ten blocks of heroin each weighing approximately 1 kilo at 68%
purity. They had an import value of £333,000 and a potential street value of around £1 million. W soon
Copyright November 2016
Banks on Sentence www.banksr.com
For more detail see http://www.banksr.co.uk/copyright-terms-cms-113.html
returned to the Skoda from his hotel and police arrested him. The car contained three more suitcases each
containing numerous packages of class A drugs with a street value of just over £3 million, making over £4
million with the other drugs. V’s hotel room was searched and it was discovered he was staying there with
D who was also arrested. The records showed they had stayed there together on 14 occasions in the previous
six months. W had on him a CMR bill (a document relating to the transport of goods by road) that detailed
the transportation of 29 pallets or car parts from Holland to an industrial unit in Northfleet, Kent. Police
searched the unit and found that drugs were being shipped into the UK and unpacked there for further
distribution. Car batteries had been hollowed out and lined with lead. This allowed a kilogram block of
drugs to be stored inside each pack with the lead foiling scanners and similar detection methods. The drugs
were accessed by unscrewing the front panel of the battery. A full DNA match for W and D was found on
cigarette butts at the unit. The basis of plea said, a) D played a very limited role, b) his only job was to repackage the batteries after the drugs had been removed, c) D was paid €600 per trip, d) he thought the drug
was marijuana and e) some of the trips related to family visits. The prosecution chose not to contest this. D
was aged 45 and had no previous convictions. The Judge found the role to be significant and started at 21
years. He reduced that to 13 years because of the mitigation and the plea. Held. With a significant role, 10
years.
340.63 Defendant aged under 18
R v CC 2015 EWCA Crim 2040 D pleaded (full credit) to possession of heroin and cocaine with intent. D,
aged 17 and 12 days, was stopped in a town centre for a drugs search. At the police station, 20 heroin and
20 cocaine wraps were found between his buttocks. D later claimed he was holding the drugs for a third
party and he was fearful of reprisals. D had 10 previous sentencing hearings for 23 offences. One offence
was for burglary and most were for violence. He had one previous conviction for possession of cannabis.
D was given Youth Rehabilitation Orders for all the convictions and he was in breach of an order. D’s claim
about holding the drugs was not accepted by the prosecution but there was no Newton hearing as the
prosecution said it was a Category 3 case as there was a financial element (giving a 4 ½-year starting point
for an adult). The Court was invited to sentence without a report and did so. One was ordered for the appeal.
D could not be interviewed for it because his bad behaviour had caused him to be moved to Wales. D could
not be interviewed by telephone because he was confined to his cell because of his behaviour. This report
said he was in care and because of bad behaviour had had 16 placements since 2011. D viewed his offending
as comical and exciting. Further, D lacked maturity and had ADHD. Held. It was a Category 3 case with a
significant role. The Judge could have started above the starting point. However, the basis of plea was
important as it was not absurd so had to be accepted. That would have put D in the bottom of the range.
Except for the breach of the Youth Rehabilitation Order there were no aggravating factors. His age of just
17 was a mitigating factor. Taking into account the days served on remand [not revealed] and the early plea,
24 months DTO not 3 years’ detention.
Copyright November 2016
Banks on Sentence www.banksr.com
For more detail see http://www.banksr.co.uk/copyright-terms-cms-113.html