R v Bruno Lepuri

Where a defendant could not reasonably have indicated a guilty plea to a conspiracy before being charged with any form of that conspiracy, a substantial reduction in guilty-plea credit cannot be justified by the absence of an earlier indication. Although delay after charge may warrant a reduced discount, the prosecution’s unexplained late addition of the charge must be fairly reflected. A sentencing judge who awards only 10% credit in those circumstances errs in principle.

The appellant pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Northampton to possession with intent to supply cocaine and to a Milton Keynes conspiracy to supply cocaine. He was later added to a Devon conspiracy count shortly before the trial of co-accused began.

He objected to that late addition. Following negotiations, the prosecution substituted a slightly differently framed Devon conspiracy count, to which he pleaded guilty on the same day. The judge imposed a concurrent sentence of 10 years and 10 months overall, allowing only 10% credit for that plea.

The appeal concerned whether that reduced credit was fair given the prosecution’s unexplained delay in charging the appellant with any Devon conspiracy.

1. Appeal allowed to a limited extent. The court quashed the sentence on count 7 and substituted 9 years and 7 months’ imprisonment. The remaining concurrent sentences and the overall structure of the sentence were unchanged.

2. The Devon conspiracy had not been charged against the appellant, nor properly subsumed in another count against him, before he was added to count 3 in December 2022. It would therefore have been unreasonable to expect him to indicate a guilty plea to any form of Devon conspiracy before then.

3. After being added to count 3, the appellant could have admitted his involvement but delayed until the prosecution added count 7. That delay meant he was not entitled to full credit. However, count 7 differed from count 3 only slightly, by removing one alleged co-conspirator.

4. The prosecution had, without explanation, delayed until shortly before trial before charging the appellant with a Devon conspiracy. In that context, the judge was wrong in principle to reduce plea credit to 10%. A 20% discount was appropriate, producing the substituted sentence on count 7.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): In [2024] EWCA Crim 1295, allowed the sentence appeal to the extent of quashing and substituting the sentence on count 7.
• Crown Court at Northampton: On 24 August 2023, imposed concurrent sentences totalling 10 years and 10 months’ imprisonment.