R v Richard Thomas Watkins & Anor

In sentencing multiple serious firearms offences, the guideline range for a single offence does not prevent a court from imposing a higher notional sentence where the overall offending includes multiple counts, compatible ammunition, and other aggravating features. The court must then apply the totality principle to reach a proportionate overall sentence.

A participant who brings a supplier and recipient together and facilitates the transfer of a deadly weapon may properly be treated as having a leading role in group offending. Acting as a middleman does not preclude classification in the high-culpability category where the evidence establishes significant planning and a key facilitating role.

Two applicants renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentences imposed at Preston Crown Court on 3 February 2023. The single judge had refused leave on 10 July 2023.

Mr Watkins had pleaded guilty to two conspiracies to possess a firearm with intent to endanger life and to further offences involving prohibited weapons and ammunition. He received an extended sentence of 22 years under section 279 of the Sentencing Act 2020. Mr German was convicted after trial of conspiracies involving a firearm and ammunition with intent to endanger life, and received an extended sentence of 16 years.

The applications challenged, respectively, totality and comparative proportionality, and Mr German’s classification as a leading participant in high-culpability offending.

1. The court refused both renewed applications for leave to appeal. None of the proposed grounds gave rise to an arguable contention that either sentence was manifestly excessive.

2. Mr Watkins’s offences were properly treated as category A, category 3 under the firearms sentencing guideline. The guideline range applied to a single offence. It was therefore open to the sentencing judge to impose notional post-trial sentences above that range to reflect two conspiracy counts, or four further offences involving two handguns, compatible ammunition and a loaded revolver. The judge then applied totality both when fixing those notional sentences and when aggregating the overall criminality on count 1. No impermissible double-counting was identified.

3. The difference between the applicants’ sentences did not establish disproportionality. Mr Watkins was the supplier and was sentenced for additional weapons and ammunition offences. The sentencing judge had not treated Mr German as the initiator of the conspiracy.

4. Mr German’s classification in the high-culpability category was supported by the evidence. The sentencing judge was entitled to find that he was the key facilitator who brought the supplier and recipient together, ensured the transfer, and acted with significant planning. A middleman can nevertheless have a leading role in group offending. The uplift from the guideline starting point also reflected three counts, compatible ammunition, a silencer and telescopic sight, serious similar previous convictions, and the fact that he remained subject to an extended sentence.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): renewed applications for leave to appeal against sentence refused: [2023] EWCA Crim 1516.
• Preston Crown Court: on 3 February 2023, His Honour Judge Parry imposed extended sentences of 22 years on Mr Watkins and 16 years on Mr German.
• Single judge: leave to appeal against sentence was refused on 10 July 2023.