Adam Farmer [2019] EWCA Crim 843

R v Adam Farmer [2019] EWCA Crim 843 was a renewed application for an extension of time and permission to appeal sentence dismissed by the Court of Appeal (Lord Justice Gross, Mr Justice Goose and Her Honour Judge Tayton QC sitting as a judge of the Criminal Appeal Division).

Mr Farmer had pleaded guilty on 20 March 2017 at Stafford Crown Court to conspiracy to supply controlled drugs contrary to section 1(1) of the Criminal Law Act 1977. His plea was entered on a written basis on the second day of trial, which the prosecution did not accept. On 14 August 2017 His Honour Judge Gosling conducted a Newton hearing, heard evidence from both the prosecution and the applicant, rejected the applicant’s basis of plea and concluded that his role in the conspiracy was a leading one. On 5 October 2017 the judge sentenced the applicant to eight-and-a-half years’ imprisonment.

The police investigation had begun with evidence of an organised crime group based in Cannock, South Staffordshire, headed by John Appleton and Michael O’Mahoney, who directed seven others in the supply of class A and B drugs. Their distribution network led police to other organised crime groups in the Midlands and South of England. The leaders of the groups communicated with each other and then with their respective lieutenants who set in train the retrieval of stock from warehouses and subsequent deliveries to the groups. The applicant was the leader of the organised crime group in Redditch.

Between 1 November 2014 and 14 June 2016 the applicant was involved in at least eight deliveries of class B drugs, namely mephedrone. Although there was some evidence that class A drugs were included, the judge was unable to be sure of that fact and accordingly sentenced on the basis of class B drugs only. The applicant’s role was exposed on 4 March 2015 when members of the Cannock group were observed travelling to Redditch to a postcode address supplied by the applicant in a text message. At the arranged meeting place a co-accused acting under the applicant’s direction passed over a bag which was taken back to Cannock. After the arrest of those individuals the bag was recovered and found to contain £14,520, with the applicant’s fingerprint impressions on the outside. Examination of telephone traffic showed text messages between the applicant and the Cannock group containing details of different Redditch postcodes on 17 occasions between 26 June 2014 and 26 February 2015. After the arrest the applicant was in regular contact with the leaders of the Cannock group during the panic that ensued after the seizure of the money. Other telephone evidence demonstrated significant contact between the applicant and the Cannock group leaders at various times during the operation of the conspiracy.

The applicant was sentenced on the basis that he played a leading role in the Redditch conspiracy and was involved in at least eight deliveries of mephedrone during the indictment period. The seizure of cash on 4 March 2015 also included five kilograms of mephedrone. The judge did not assess the total drugs involved by assuming that each of the eight deliveries involved five kilograms. Nevertheless, he reached the sure conclusion on the evidence that the total quantity of drugs must have been well over 20 kilograms.

On behalf of the applicant it was argued that the judge failed to give any effect to the only available mitigating factor, namely that whilst he had a number of previous convictions, none was for drugs supply. It was further submitted that the judge did not explain why he increased the sentence from the starting point of eight years for a leading role Category 1 offence of class B drug supply to nine years.

The single judge had dismissed the application for permission to appeal, giving reasons that there was little if any real weight to be attached to the fact that the applicant had no previous relevant convictions when he had a number of other lesser convictions and was head of an organised crime group. The single judge noted that the indicative range for Category 1A class B drug supply has a starting point of eight years’ imprisonment after trial for 20 kilograms, that this case involved well over 20 kilograms requiring an increase in the starting point, and that the applicant’s leading role was in a substantial and active crime group, justifying an increase in the starting point.

The Court of Appeal rejected the grounds of appeal. Mr Justice Goose, giving the judgment of the court, stated that the court had considered carefully the grounds of appeal and the oral submissions made on behalf of the applicant. For the reasons given by the single judge, with which the court agreed, the court was not persuaded that the application had any arguable grounds for success. The judge had correctly increased the starting point to reflect the quantity of drugs and could not be criticised for so doing. The discount of five per cent for the late plea of guilty after an adverse finding in the Newton hearing could not be faulted. Since the court found no merit in the application for permission to appeal, it also refused the application for an extension of time of 369 days.

In short, the court refused both the application for an extension of time and permission to appeal, finding no arguable error in the judge’s approach to sentence for the applicant’s leading role in a substantial drug supply conspiracy involving well over 20 kilograms of class B drugs.