David Dean Pedley [2019] EWCA Crim 1308

The applicant changed his plea after the opening of the prosecution case and pleaded guilty to three counts of conspiracy to supply cocaine. On a second indictment he was convicted at a retrial of conspiracy to transfer a prohibited firearm. He was sentenced to concurrent terms of 10 years and 9 months’ imprisonment for each of the drug conspiracies and a consecutive term of 6 years and 3 months for the firearm charge.

The second indictment included a count of conspiracy to rob on which the applicant was acquitted. A previous conviction was admitted at the trial, this was for the robbery of a cash in transit van with the use of a firearm which was very similar to the current case and had taken place with the same co-accused. The defence argued that the case should have been withdrawn from the jury and that the previous conviction was admitted in support of a weak case. It was a single conviction and so not capable of establishing propensity and was so prejudicial it should have been excluded.

Held: the submissions did not even arguably demonstrate that the conviction was unsafe. The judge rightly concluded that the jury could find that the combination of circumstances made them sure of the applicant’s guilt. The previous conviction was capable of showing a relevant propensity and was of significance for the reasons the judge gave, it was not so unfairly prejudicial that it ought to be excluded. Leave to appeal conviction was refused.

As to sentence the Court noted that his guilty plea to the drugs conspiracies had a ‘domino effect’ leading to 5 co-accused pleading guilty, saving substantial court time. The Court also took account of the fact that while awaiting sentence a riot took place in prison, he did not get involved and saved the life of a vulnerable prisoner. The judge also should have made a greater reduction than she did to take account of the delay in sentence that was not attributable to him. The overall sentence was reduced by one year.