Homepage

Success for Robert Stevenson in Attorney General's Reference Case

Date:

23rd January 2012

Team:

Crime.

In a two day hearing before the Court of Appeal, 21 defendants faced the prospect of having their sentence increased on the ground that their original sentence was unduly lenient.  Ultimately the tribunal, chaired by Lord Justice Hughes, increased the sentences of fifteen of the defendants.  Paul Richardson, represented by Robert Stevenson, was one of the fortunate few to leave without having his sentence increased.

Over the course of several weeks in September and October 2011, 27 defendants were sentenced, by HHJ Cartlidge sitting at Newcastle Crown Court, for their involvement in a conspiracy to supply class A drugs.

The defendants were variously involved in a sophisticated and highly commercial drug dealing operation over the course of eighteen months, during which large quantities of cocaine were transported from Liverpool to the North East.  The extensive police investigation identified 32 separate shipments, and whilst it was not possible for the prosecution to accurately assess the amount of drugs that were exchanged on each occasion, the estimate upon which the Court proceeded was that cocaine was being trafficked in shipments of a quarter of a kilo.

The three main organisers in the conspiracy received sentences of around nine years’ imprisonment, which allowed credit for their early guilty pleas.  Their sentences were not subject to the application by the Attorney General.

The defendants who had pleaded guilty to assisting in the storage of the drugs and those involved in transporting or dealing the drugs were nearly all found to have received sentences that were unduly lenient.  In accordance with their particular level of involvement, each of these defendants had their sentences of imprisonment increased to between six and a half years at the highest and three years at the lowest.

Paul Richardson, who had pleaded guilty to being part of the conspiracy on a limited basis, which was that he agreed to allow drugs to be stored in a car on two occasions, received a suspended sentence of imprisonment.  He was of previous good character and in the various letters provided to the Court it was clear that Mr Richardson is a hardworking man who provides for his wife and young daughter.  The judge at first instance had said that he found it ‘just possible’ to suspend Mr Richardson’s sentence of imprisonment and the Court of Appeal agreed.