R v Karl Pettitt

In sentencing a drug-supply conspiracy, harm may be assessed from messages and reasonable inferences where no drugs are recovered. Indicative quantities in the Sentencing Council Guideline are not determinative where the offending is not supply directly to users. The court must calibrate the offender’s role and harm category from the evidence as a whole. A category 2, leading-role offence carrying an 11-year starting point could not attract an unexplained increase to 12 years before aggravating and mitigating factors were considered. Previous convictions and offending while on licence justified increasing the sentence to 13 years. Separate verdicts on two counts are not irreconcilable where the counts depend on materially different evidence.

The applicant was convicted after a jury trial in the Crown Court at Kingston upon Hull of conspiracy to supply a class A drug and was acquitted of possession of a class A drug with intent to supply. He was sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment on the conspiracy count.

He renewed applications for leave to appeal against conviction and sentence. The conviction grounds concerned the admission of dealer lists, text messages and alleged inconsistency between the verdicts. The sentence grounds concerned the assessment of harm, the applicant’s role and community impact. The central issues were whether the conviction was unsafe and whether the sentence was excessive.

The renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction was refused. The renewed application for leave to appeal against sentence was granted, and the sentence appeal was allowed to the limited extent stated below.

1. Conviction evidence. The trial judge made no arguable error in admitting the dealer lists. Their relevance and probative value, including the disputed question of their age, were matters for the jury. The judge properly considered Police and Criminal Evidence Act 1984, section 78, and the bad-character issue under section 101(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003.
2. The text messages were properly admitted. The judge correctly assessed whether they were hearsay and, alternatively, whether they satisfied the interests-of-justice gateway in section 114(1)(d) of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. He gave careful directions limiting the use of the messages and warning against over-reliance.
3. The verdicts were not irreconcilable. Count 1 depended on the text messages and count 2 depended on the cocaine recovered from the shop. The acquittal on possession could reflect doubt about whether the drugs had been planted, while leaving the conspiracy conviction supported by the separate evidence.
4. Sentence. The judge was entitled to find that the applicant had played a leading role and that the offending fell within harm category 2. The evidence as a whole justified that conclusion despite the absence of recovered drugs, the acquittal on count 2 and the dealer lists relating to an earlier period. The guideline’s indicative quantities did not require category 3 treatment because the evidence did not establish supply directly to users.
5. For a category 2 offence involving a leading role, the appropriate starting point was 11 years. Increasing that starting point to 12 years before considering aggravating and mitigating features was unjustified. The applicant’s previous convictions and offending while on licence warranted an increase to 13 years. The sentence of 15 years was quashed and a sentence of 13 years was substituted. The victim surcharge order was maintained because no prejudice had been caused.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): [2022] EWCA Crim 1377. The renewed application for leave to appeal against conviction was refused. Leave was granted on sentence, the sentence appeal was allowed to the limited extent that the 15-year sentence was quashed, and 13 years’ imprisonment was substituted.
• Crown Court at Kingston upon Hull: on 4 May 2021 the applicant was convicted of conspiracy to supply a class A drug and acquitted of possession of a class A drug with intent to supply. On 14 May 2021 he was sentenced to 15 years’ imprisonment.