Gibbon & Ors, R v

A guilty plea entered after a trial has begun may properly attract only limited credit, even where the jury was discharged through no fault of the defendants. The discharge interrupts, rather than restarts, the trial process.

Sentences for drug conspiracies require an assessment of the whole criminality. The quantity of drugs in a comparator case is relevant but does not dictate a proportionate sentence. Relative culpability must remain reflected in the sentencing hierarchy. A sentence for a subordinate participant may be excessive where its starting point, even after proper plea credit, places it too close to that imposed on a trusted lieutenant.

Following an aborted trial in the Crown Court at Southampton, Nigel Gibbon, Stuart Gibbon and Gary Jackson pleaded guilty to a conspiracy to supply class A drugs. Nigel Gibbon also pleaded guilty to offences involving criminal property. Nigel Gibbon received 16 years’ imprisonment, Stuart Gibbon 12 years, and Jackson nine years.

Nigel and Stuart Gibbon renewed applications for permission to appeal sentence after refusal by the single judge. Jackson appealed with permission. They contended that the sentences were excessive, particularly by comparison with Attorney General’s Reference Nos 99 to 102 (Whiteway and others) [2005] EWCA Crim 294, and raised issues concerning plea credit, role and disparity.

1. The court refused the renewed applications of Nigel and Stuart Gibbon. It allowed Jackson’s appeal in part and reduced his sentence from nine years to eight years’ imprisonment.

2. The 10 per cent discount allowed to Nigel and Stuart Gibbon for their guilty pleas was generous and could not be criticised. Although the first jury had been discharged through no fault of the defendants, the trial had already begun and had proceeded almost to the end of the Crown case. Their pleas were therefore, in substance, entered mid-trial.

3. The comparison with Attorney General’s Reference Nos 99 to 102 (Whiteway and others) [2005] EWCA Crim 294 did not show that Nigel Gibbon’s sentence was excessive. Drug quantity was not the only measure of seriousness. His conspiracy lasted almost five years and involved large-scale trafficking in highly pernicious drugs. The judge’s post-trial starting point of 18 years properly reflected those features and the limited mitigation.

4. Stuart Gibbon’s sentence was also justified. His activities immediately after his father’s arrest, including efforts to conceal evidence and protect the enterprise, confirmed that he had been his father’s trusted lieutenant. The judge had sentenced him on the accepted basis of plea and had not overstated the duration of his involvement.

5. Jackson’s lesser and shorter role required a clearer sentencing distinction. The judge had intended to allow him greater plea credit. Restoring a notional 20 per cent discount showed that the nine-year sentence had a starting point too close to Stuart Gibbon’s 12-year sentence. Eight years was the appropriate sentence. Time on remand continued to count.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) — Jackson’s appeal against sentence was allowed in part. The renewed applications of Nigel and Stuart Gibbon for permission to appeal sentence were refused.
• Crown Court at Southampton — Following guilty pleas, Nigel Gibbon was sentenced to 16 years’ imprisonment, Stuart Gibbon to 12 years, and Jackson to nine years.