Attorney General's Reference Nos 13,17, 16, 15, 14 & 18 of 2004

A serious and organised retail conspiracy to supply heroin may properly attract a sentence at the top of the range for retail distribution where it involves sustained dealing, numerous participants, young dealers or purchasers, open transactions within the community, children present during supplies, and the acceptance of stolen goods as payment.

Individual sentences must reflect each offender’s role and personal mitigation. A late guilty plea does not merit enhanced credit merely because the offender waited to assess the strength of video evidence. When increasing sentences on an Attorney General’s reference, the court must allow for double jeopardy.

The Attorney General sought leave under section 36 of the Criminal Justice Act 1988 to refer as unduly lenient the sentences imposed at Birmingham Crown Court on six offenders convicted of conspiracy to supply heroin between August and November 2002.

The conspiracy operated an organised retail enterprise from two residential premises. Heroin was sold in frequent small transactions for cash or stolen goods. The operation involved young dealers, took place openly in community areas, and occurred in the presence of children.

The central issue was whether the sentences reflected the gravity of the organised retail heroin conspiracy and each offender’s respective role.

1. Leave was granted and all six sentences were quashed as unduly lenient. The court substituted higher sentences, while reducing the terms that would otherwise have been appropriate to reflect double jeopardy.

2. The conspiracy was a significant and organised retail heroin enterprise. Its seriousness was increased by the scale and frequency of dealing, the number of participants, the involvement of young dealers and apparent young purchasers, dealing in public community spaces, the presence of children during supplies, and the acceptance of stolen goods in payment. The operation’s effect on residents of the estate was also material.

3. Sharon McKeown and Peter Baria were properly treated as being at the forefront of the conspiracy. The trial judge was best placed to assess relative culpability, and there was no basis to disturb her finding that Baria remained involved after dealing moved premises. The proper post-trial sentence for each was about ten years. Each received eight years’ imprisonment after allowance for double jeopardy.

4. Nigel McKeown was a significant contributor and allowed his home to be used for substantial heroin supply. His proper post-trial sentence was about eight years; his sentence was increased from three to five years’ imprisonment. Jason McKeown was the most prolific street dealer. His sentence was increased from three and a half to five and a half years’ imprisonment.

5. A defendant who delays a guilty plea until satisfied that video evidence proves guilt is not thereby entitled to additional credit. Adam Parsons’ lesser role and age justified a lower starting point, but his detention was increased from three and a half to five years. Leon Jones’ limited role justified a lower sentence than the principal offenders, but his imprisonment was increased from three and a half to four and a half years.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Granted the Attorney General leave to refer the sentences as unduly lenient, quashed the six Crown Court sentences, and substituted higher sentences.
• Crown Court at Birmingham: Her Honour Judge Fisher sentenced the six offenders on 13 January 2004 following convictions for conspiracy to supply heroin.

Two separate applications by co-defendants for leave to appeal sentence were abandoned.