Jamie Lee Fitzgerald [2019] EWCA Crim 1506

R v Jamie Lee Fitzgerald [2019] EWCA Crim 1506 concerned an appeal against sentence for three offences of conveying list A articles into prison contrary to the Prison Act 1952, heard by the Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) comprising Lady Justice Rafferty DBE, Mr Justice Jeremy Baker and Mrs Justice McGowan DBE.

Mr Fitzgerald, aged 32, had pleaded guilty in the Crown Court at Bolton on 8 May 2019 to conveying cannabis resin, bush cannabis and 20 steroid tablets into prison. He received a total sentence of 18 months’ imprisonment after full credit for his guilty plea at the first available opportunity.

On 2 September 2018 Mr Fitzgerald visited his cousin at HMP Hindley. Security staff monitoring the visitors’ area by CCTV observed him acting suspiciously. Prison officers approached him and seized a package wrapped in clingfilm. When the police attended and opened it, the drugs were found inside. Mr Fitzgerald had been asked by his cousin to bring the drugs in and had agreed, obtaining them and taking them into the prison.

In passing sentence the learned judge observed that anyone involved in smuggling such items into prison commits an offence passing the custody threshold by a significant degree. He relied upon previous authorities in which this court had made clear that smuggling drugs into prison undermines the order of custodial institutions and causes problems for those responsible for supervising prisons and looking after inmates’ welfare. Mr Fitzgerald had a significant record of previous offending, principally for dishonesty, though with no previous convictions for drug supply or Prison Act offences beyond simple possession. He had been released from custody only two months before committing this offence and had been recalled three times during his last licence period, on each occasion apparently due to alcohol and drug misuse. The pre-sentence report assessed him as presenting a high risk of reoffending and medium risk of serious harm.

On appeal Miss Shaw submitted that the starting point taken by the judge was too high. She drew an analogy to the drug supply guideline and identified that this fell within the significant role, Category 4 part of that guideline, for which the starting point would be a high level community order.

The court rejected that submission. Mrs Justice McGowan, giving the judgment, accepted that the drugs guidelines were helpful in sentencing offences of this sort but emphasised that the reality was that the mischief lay in bringing the drugs into prison. That was a very significant aggravating feature and whilst the court relied upon the guidelines for some assistance, they could not determine the final prison sentence to be imposed. The court held that the offending fell way outside the range identified by Miss Shaw. Taking drugs into prison was pernicious. It caused discipline problems within custodial institutions, endangered the safety of inmates and staff and added greatly to the burden of trying to impose discipline. The court re-endorsed the expression that smuggling drugs into prison undermines the order of custodial institutions. Having been given full credit for his plea entered at the earliest opportunity, the total sentence of 18 months could not be said to be wrong in principle or manifestly excessive, reflecting as it did a total sentence for three separate offences of bringing different items into prison on this occasion.

In short, the appeal against an 18-month sentence for conveying drugs and steroids into prison was dismissed, the court holding that the custodial term properly reflected the seriousness of undermining prison security and order.