R v Babak Rasouli
[2023] EWCA Crim 229
R v Bruno Lepuri
11 October 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 1295
Court of Appeal
A man was convicted of drug crimes and got different amounts of sentence reduction for his guilty pleas depending on when he pleaded guilty. The court decided he should have gotten more reduction for one of the pleas because the prosecution took too long to add that charge, making it unfair to expect an earlier guilty plea. His sentence was changed to give him more of a reduction.
Key Facts
- •Appellant pleaded guilty to possession with intent to supply 250g of cocaine (possession offence), and two counts of conspiracy to supply cocaine (counts 1 and 7).
- •Sentenced to 6 years (possession), 7 years 10 months (count 1), and 10 years 10 months (count 7), all concurrent (total 10 years 10 months).
- •Appellant was 23 with no prior convictions.
- •Count 7 (Devon conspiracy) added to indictment late, after the trial began.
- •Judge gave 25% credit for pleas on possession and count 1, but only 10% for count 7 due to late plea.
- •Appeal concerned insufficient credit for the guilty plea on count 7.
Legal Principles
Sentencing guidelines for drug trafficking offences.
Sentencing Council Guidelines
Principle of totality in sentencing.
Case law (implied)
Credit for guilty pleas; consideration of timing and circumstances.
Case law (implied)
Outcomes
Appeal allowed in part.
The judge wrongly reduced the discount for the plea on count 7 due to the prosecution's unexplained delay in adding the appellant to the Devon conspiracy. The delay made it unreasonable to expect an earlier guilty plea.
Sentence on count 7 quashed.
Insufficient credit given for the late guilty plea.
Sentence on count 7 substituted.
A new sentence of 9 years and 7 months was imposed, reflecting a 20% discount for the plea.