R v George Pavlou

When sentencing for transferring a firearm, the court may use reliable evidence of wider sourcing activity to assess the nature of the enterprise and the offender’s role. It must not, however, increase the guideline starting point on the basis of additional transfers which the evidence does not establish and which were not charged.

An independent street-level cannabis dealer who neither directs nor involves others may properly fall within significant rather than leading culpability. A consecutive sentence may reflect separate criminality, but it must remain proportionate after applying totality.

R v George Pavlou concerned an appeal against sentences imposed at the Crown Court at Northampton for transferring a loaded prohibited firearm and ammunition, supplying cannabis, and possessing criminal property.

The applicant had supplied a loaded converted revolver to a co-accused. Messages showed efforts over several months to source firearms. The sentencing judge treated the firearms offending as category 2 harm and significant culpability, but adopted an elevated starting point. He also treated the applicant’s cannabis dealing as between a leading and significant role.

The central issues were whether the firearms sentence had impermissibly reflected uncharged wider firearms trading, whether the drugs role had been overstated, and what consecutive sentence totality permitted.

1. Appeal allowed in part. The court granted leave, quashed the 14-year sentence for transferring the firearm, and substituted 12 years’ imprisonment. It also quashed the consecutive 15-month drugs sentence and substituted six months. The total sentence was therefore reduced from 15 years and three months to 12 years and six months.
2. The judge was entitled to consider the applicant’s messages when assessing the firearms enterprise. They supported category 2 harm and a significant role because they showed sustained attempts to obtain firearms for customers. The judge was also entitled to use the category B2 starting point of 10 years’ imprisonment.
3. There was no evidential basis, however, for treating the applicant as having actually transferred more than one firearm. Nor had he been charged with further offences of that kind. The judge therefore lacked a sufficient basis to increase the B2 starting point from 10 to 12 years. A two-year increase for the applicant’s record and the supply of ammunition was justified, producing a 12-year sentence. Mitigation was limited.
4. For the cannabis offence, the applicant ran his own dealing operation and did not involve others after obtaining supplies. He fell squarely within significant-role culpability and category 3 harm. The starting point of three and a half years was excessive. After allowing for aggravation, guilty plea and totality, six months consecutively was appropriate because the drugs offending was separate criminality.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): In [2024] EWCA Crim 1135, the court granted leave and allowed the sentence appeal in part, substituting a total sentence of 12 years and six months’ imprisonment.
• Crown Court at Northampton: On 8 June 2023, His Honour Judge Herbert imposed a total sentence of 15 years and three months’ imprisonment.