Wood & Anor, R. v

In sentencing participants in a drug-supply conspiracy, the sentence must reflect each offender’s relative role, responsibility and criminal benefit. A substantial disparity between an organiser at the apex of the conspiracy and a subordinate participant may require a correspondingly clear difference in sentence. An appellate court will not interfere with a sentence for the principal offender where the sentencing judge correctly identifies a large-scale conspiracy and the overall sentence remains justified by the offending and personal mitigation.

Flynn and Wood made renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentences imposed at Swansea Crown Court for their participation in a conspiracy to supply cocaine and ecstasy in West Wales. Flynn also received concurrent sentences for possession of cannabis with intent to supply and handling stolen goods.

The sentencing judge treated Flynn as the principal conspirator who sourced drugs from Manchester and arranged their supply through Wood. Wood was treated as Flynn’s right-hand man, arranging delivery and distribution in Pembrokeshire.

The central issue was whether the sentences sufficiently reflected the scale of the conspiracy and the material difference between the applicants’ respective responsibility and benefit.

1. Flynn’s renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence was refused. The court accepted that the quantity of Class A drugs actually seized was relatively small. However, the records found at Flynn’s home, the number of recipients, the money owed to him, and the proceeds evidence supported the sentencing judge’s conclusion that this was a large-scale conspiracy.

2. Flynn was properly treated as the conspirator at the apex. He obtained cocaine and ecstasy from Manchester, orchestrated their supply to West Wales, and received the proceeds. The court found no defect in the sentencing judge’s approach to the nine-year sentence, after allowing full credit for the guilty plea and taking account of Flynn’s good character, post-traumatic stress disorder, addiction, and low risk of reoffending.

3. Wood’s appeal was allowed to a limited extent. Although he was Flynn’s right-hand man, his role and responsibility were materially lower. His benefit was approximately £38,000, whereas documents showed that Flynn was owed about £130,000. This disparity supported the conclusion that Wood’s criminality was insufficiently differentiated from Flynn’s by the seven-year sentence.

4. The court granted Wood leave to appeal, quashed his seven-year sentence for conspiracy, and substituted a sentence of six years’ imprisonment. The reduction properly reflected the lesser level of his offending while preserving the seriousness of his role in the conspiracy.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Wood was granted leave to appeal against sentence. His sentence was reduced from seven years’ to six years’ imprisonment. Flynn’s renewed application for leave to appeal against his nine-year sentence was refused.
• Swansea Crown Court: On 22 February 2008, Flynn was sentenced to nine years’ imprisonment for conspiracy to supply Class A drugs, with concurrent sentences for the additional offences. Wood was sentenced to seven years’ imprisonment for the conspiracy.