R v Rayon Wheatley
[2023] EWCA Crim 1195
R v Chinonye David Anyiam
11 July 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 846
Court of Appeal
A man was given two prison sentences, one for drug dealing and another for violence. He appealed, arguing the combined sentence was too long. The judge said the sentences were fair given the different crimes, and the appeal was refused.
Key Facts
- •Appellant (26) appeals against a 27-month sentence for possessing a class B drug with intent to supply and offering to supply a class B drug (concurrent sentences), consecutive to a 30-month sentence for violent disorder and possessing a machete.
- •Offences involved dealing in skunk cannabis via Snapchat, with evidence including a large quantity of drugs found in a laundry bag thrown from a window, and incriminating messages on an iPhone.
- •Appellant had previous convictions, including for drug possession and other offences.
- •The judge considered the appellant's role as between significant and leading in the drug supply operation.
- •The judge imposed consecutive sentences due to the different nature of the drug and violent offences.
Legal Principles
Totality principle in sentencing.
Sentencing Council guideline on totality.
Outcomes
Appeal dismissed.
The court considered the totality principle and concluded that sufficient account had been taken of the earlier sentences. Concurrent sentences were already in place for some earlier offences, and considering a notional joint sentencing of all offences, a consecutive sentence for the drug offences was deemed just and proportionate. The different nature of the offences was a relevant factor but not sufficient on its own to justify purely consecutive sentencing.