R v Robert Wooldridge
[2023] EWCA Crim 1410
R v Joanne Yeates
19 May 2023
[2023] EWCA Crim 719
Court of Appeal
A woman got a long sentence for helping drug dealers because of a law that says she must get a long sentence if she's been caught before. A court decided the judge didn't follow the rules properly when deciding her sentence, so they gave her a shorter one.
Key Facts
- •Joanne Yeates (49) pleaded guilty to two counts of being concerned in supplying Class A drugs.
- •She was observed driving a car containing three others with drugs; one possessing 33 deals of crack cocaine and 46 deals of heroin.
- •Yeates claimed she was paid £100 to drive the others and was unaware of the drug dealing.
- •Yeates had 15 previous convictions, including three for Class A drug possession, two for permitting premises for drug supply, one for being concerned in the supply of a Class A drug, and three for attempting to supply Class A drugs.
- •Two previous convictions and the current one triggered the mandatory minimum seven-year sentence under section 313 of the Sentencing Act 2020, unless 'particular circumstances' made it unjust.
- •The sentencing judge imposed the minimum sentence, reduced by 20% for the guilty plea, resulting in a sentence of approximately five years and eight months.
- •The appeal argued the judge failed to give sufficient weight to Yeates' personal circumstances, the antiquity of previous offences, and the circumstances of the current offence.
Legal Principles
Sentencing courts should beware of circumventing Parliament's intention by an unduly liberal approach to the statutory exception for mandatory minimum sentences.
Woofe [2019] EWCA (Crim) 2249
The correct approach is to apply sentencing guidelines first, then determine if the resulting sentence complies with minimum sentence provisions. Only if not, consider those provisions.
Woofe [2019] EWCA (Crim) 2249
One way to test the justice of applying minimum sentence provisions is to ask if the sentence would be markedly more severe than one imposed using sentencing guidelines. The guideline sentence is part of the context for assessing the justice of imposing the higher statutory minimum.
Woofe [2019] EWCA (Crim) 2249
The passage of time since the last qualifying offence may be a factor, but not necessarily sufficient to make application of the minimum term unjust.
Woofe [2019] EWCA (Crim) 2249
Section 73(3)(a) of the Sentencing Act 2020 allows a maximum 20% reduction for a guilty plea in cases subject to mandatory minimum sentences.
Sentencing Act 2020, section 73(3)(a)
Outcomes
The Court of Appeal quashed the original sentence.
The sentencing judge failed to apply the correct principles regarding mandatory minimum sentences, specifically not considering the sentencing guidelines first and not adequately comparing the guideline sentence to the statutory minimum. The disparity between the guideline sentence (approximately three years) and the imposed sentence (five years and eight months) was deemed 'markedly more severe'. The Court also considered the significant time elapsed since Yeates' last qualifying offence and her demonstrated ability to maintain employment.
A sentence of three years' imprisonment concurrent on each count was substituted.
This sentence reflected the application of the relevant sentencing guidelines, taking into account Yeates' lesser role, guilty plea, and mitigating circumstances.