R v Przemyslaw Libert
[2023] EWCA Crim 1556
R v George Pavlou
11 July 2024
[2024] EWCA Crim 1135
Court of Appeal
A man was given a long prison sentence for selling a gun and drugs. The appeal court decided the sentence was too harsh because the judge considered things the man wasn't actually convicted of. They lowered the prison time.
Key Facts
- •George Pavlou convicted of transferring a prohibited weapon and ammunition (Firearms Act 1968), being concerned in the supply of cannabis, and possessing criminal property (Misuse of Drugs Act 1971 & Proceeds of Crime Act 2002).
- •Initially sentenced to 15 years and 3 months imprisonment.
- •Transferred a loaded pistol to Dalston Phillips, evidenced by police surveillance, DNA, and phone records.
- •Phone records showed Pavlou's intention to sell firearms, using slang terms.
- •Pavlou admitted to cannabis dealing, claiming 3-6 months involvement, 3kg purchase, £3600 profit.
- •Previous conviction for conspiracy to burgle (2015).
Legal Principles
Sentencing guidelines for firearms offences (Category 2B, medium culpability B).
Sentencing Guidelines
Sentencing guidelines for drug offences (leading vs. significant role).
Sentencing Guidelines
Totality principle in sentencing.
Case Law (implied)
Outcomes
Appeal against sentence partially allowed.
The original sentence was considered excessive for the specific offences. The judge improperly considered a wider conspiracy than proven. The starting point for the firearms sentence was too high and the drugs sentence overestimated Pavlou's role.
14-year sentence for firearm transfer reduced to 12 years.
While the judge correctly categorized harm and Pavlou's role, increasing the starting point to 12 years was unjustified given the lack of evidence for multiple firearm transfers.
15-month consecutive sentence for drug dealing reduced to 6 months.
The 3.5-year starting point for drug dealing was too high, given Pavlou’s ‘significant’ role within his own operation and the relevant sentencing guidelines.