R v Colin Peter Evans

For a statutory minimum sentence for repeat Class A drug trafficking, the court must consider whether exceptional circumstances relating to the offence or offender justify disapplication under the Sentencing Act 2020. The assessment is holistic. A single striking feature or the combined effect of several features may suffice, although ordinary lower culpability, mitigation or a guilty plea alone will not. The seriousness of previous offending and the time elapsed are relevant. A very small one-off supply to fund addiction, a long offence-free period and well-evidenced rehabilitation may together make the minimum term arbitrary and disproportionate. If the resulting guideline sentence is custodial, suspension should be considered. A realistic prospect of rehabilitation, low risk, strong mitigation and the absence of a need for immediate custody may justify suspension.

The appellant pleaded guilty to supplying a small quantity of diamorphine to another drug user. The Crown Court at Cardiff imposed a seven-year statutory minimum term, reduced by 20 per cent for the guilty plea, resulting in 2,045 days' imprisonment. The appellant appealed with permission, arguing that the circumstances of the offence and his rehabilitation were exceptional under section 313 of the Sentencing Act 2020. The central issue was whether the Recorder had erred in finding that the statutory minimum could not be disapplied.

1. Appeal allowed. The Court quashed the sentence of 2,045 days' imprisonment and substituted a sentence of 20 months' imprisonment, suspended for 12 months, with supervision and 10 Rehabilitation Activity Requirement days. No additional punitive elements were imposed because of the time already spent in custody.
2. Statutory test. Under section 313(2A) of the Sentencing Act 2020, the court had to impose at least the seven-year minimum specified by section 313(1), unless exceptional circumstances relating to the offence or offender justified not doing so. The Sentencing Council guidance required the circumstances to be truly exceptional. The minimum term would need to produce an arbitrary and disproportionate sentence. The court had to assess all the circumstances together. A single striking factor or the collective impact of several factors could suffice. The seriousness of previous offending and the time elapsed between offences were relevant. Lower culpability, ordinary mitigation and a guilty plea were not exceptional merely because they were present.
3. Application. The offence involved a single wrap containing a very small quantity of diamorphine supplied to an entrenched Class A drug user to help fund the appellant's own addiction. He had committed no drug offences for almost ten years before the offence and none in the following two years and eight months. He had voluntarily engaged with addiction treatment since 2020, made significant progress on the Buvidal programme, addressed longstanding trauma and opiate addiction, and had strong support from health professionals, family and neighbours. Taken together, those matters established exceptional circumstances. The Recorder's contrary conclusion was wrong in principle and made the sentence manifestly excessive.
4. Suspension. The appropriate sentence without the minimum-term provisions was 30 months, reduced by one-third for the guilty plea, producing 20 months. Suspension was appropriate because there was a realistic prospect of rehabilitation, no high risk of reoffending or harm, and strong personal mitigation. Immediate custody was not required by the seriousness of the offence, the appellant did not present a significant risk to others, and there was no reason to doubt future compliance with court orders.

• Court of Appeal (Criminal Division): [2026] EWCA Crim 495 allowed the appeal, quashed the 2,045-day sentence and substituted a suspended sentence of 20 months with supervision and rehabilitation requirements.
• Crown Court at Cardiff: On 2 July 2025, Mr Recorder Jowett imposed the statutory minimum term, reduced by 20 per cent for the guilty plea.