R v Oussama Bouhamidi

Under section 313(2A) of the Sentencing Act 2020, the seven-year minimum term for qualifying repeat class A drug-trafficking offending may be disapplied only where the circumstances are truly exceptional and justify departure. The assessment is holistic. It asks whether imposing the minimum would be arbitrary and disproportionate, while respecting Parliament’s deterrent purpose.

Separate convictions do not become exceptional merely because they arose during an earlier period of offending. Continued drug supply after a guilty plea and while on bail, followed by further offending after release, strongly supports the statutory minimum. Where that minimum applies, section 373(3) restricts guilty-plea credit to 20 per cent.

The applicant pleaded guilty at Lewes Crown Court to four offences involving the supply and possession with intent to supply class A drugs, and possessing criminal property. The offences formed part of two county-lines operations supplying drugs from London to Brighton.

He had qualifying prior drug-trafficking convictions. On 3 May 2023 the Crown Court imposed concurrent sentences totalling 2,045 days’ imprisonment, reflecting the statutory seven-year minimum after 20 per cent credit for the guilty pleas.

He sought leave to appeal against sentence. He contended that his earlier convictions represented one continuing period of offending and that exceptional circumstances justified a sentence below the minimum. He also challenged the guideline starting point and the restriction of plea credit.

1. Application for leave refused. The court held that the applicant had not shown exceptional circumstances within section 313(2A) of the Sentencing Act 2020 which justified disapplying the seven-year minimum term.
2. The statutory change from “particular circumstances” to “exceptional circumstances” required guidance from the minimum-sentence authorities under the Firearms Act 1968. The court applied the principles summarised in R v Nancarrow [2019] EWCA Crim 470. The assessment must consider all circumstances together. Departure is reserved for a case in which the minimum term would be arbitrary and disproportionate, and courts must not too readily undermine Parliament’s deterrent purpose.
3. The applicant’s earlier convictions were separate qualifying convictions. After pleading guilty to one drug offence in August 2020, he was granted bail and continued to supply drugs. He was later convicted and sentenced for further offending, and committed the present offences after release. The sentencing judge was therefore entitled to find no exceptional circumstances.
4. Independently, a seven-year sentence was available under the applicable guideline. The applicant had a significant role, fell towards the top of the category 3 range, had relevant and recent convictions, and offended while on licence.
5. Although 25 per cent credit might in principle have been available at the plea and trial preparation hearing, the applicant’s basis of plea required investigation and was abandoned when a Newton hearing was sought. More than 20 per cent credit was not required. In any event, once the statutory minimum applied, section 373(3) prevented credit exceeding 20 per cent.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): Refused the application for leave to appeal against sentence: [2023] EWCA Crim 1066.
• Crown Court at Lewes: Following guilty pleas on 11 April 2023, imposed concurrent sentences on 3 May 2023 totalling 2,045 days’ imprisonment.