Coleman, R. v

Factual and Procedural Background

The Appellant, aged 33 at the time, pleaded guilty on 11 July 2023 during the second day of trial in the Crown Court at Kingston-upon-Thames before Her Honour Judge Coello. On 24 August 2023, the Appellant was sentenced by HHJ Coello for multiple offences including conspiracy to supply Class A drug (cocaine), conspiracy to transfer criminal property, conspiracy to possess prohibited weapons and ammunition, possession of cocaine with intent to supply (street supply), and possession of criminal property related to the drug offences.

The lead offences were the conspiracy to supply cocaine and the conspiracy to supply prohibited weapons, with sentences reflecting the totality of drug and firearm-related offending. The total effective sentence was 21 years' imprisonment, comprising 13 years on the drug conspiracy count and 8 years consecutive on the weapons conspiracy count, alongside concurrent sentences on other counts.

The Appellant sought a 9-day extension of time to apply for leave to appeal the sentence on the grounds that it was manifestly excessive; this was following refusal by a single judge.

Between March and June 2020, the Appellant was involved in conspiracies to supply kilogram quantities of cocaine, transfer criminal property (amounting to just under £1 million), and possess prohibited weapons and ammunition. The offending was uncovered following the disruption of the EncroChat encrypted communication network, which the Appellant used under the handle "LousyBrandy". Evidence showed the Appellant facilitated the supply of approximately 26 kilograms of cocaine and was involved in acquiring multiple prohibited firearms and ammunition for use in connection with the drug dealing operation.

On 23 February 2021, the Appellant was arrested at his home where significant amounts of cash and drugs were found. The Appellant denied involvement in drug or firearm supply during police interview but declined to answer further questions. Analysis of the Appellant’s mobile phone revealed images and messages consistent with drug supply activities.

The Appellant had one prior conviction from 2010 for possession of a Class B controlled drug with intent.

Legal Issues Presented

1. Whether the Appellant should be granted an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal against sentence.
2. Whether the sentences imposed on Counts 1 (conspiracy to supply cocaine), 5 (conspiracy to possess prohibited weapons), and 9 (possession with intent to supply cocaine) were manifestly excessive.

Arguments of the Parties

Appellant's Arguments

• The Appellant contended that his role in the cocaine conspiracy (Count 1) was significant but not leading, thus the sentence should reflect a lesser role.
• No credit was given for the guilty plea on the weapons conspiracy (Count 5).
• The sentence on Count 9 was argued to be outside the applicable sentencing Guidelines.
• The judge erred in stating that the Appellant had a money counting machine and drivers assisting him.
• The sentence was improperly increased by one year due to the use of an EncroChat device.

Table of Precedents Cited

No precedents were cited in the provided opinion.

Court's Reasoning and Analysis

The court carefully examined the grounds raised by the Appellant and found none to amount to a manifestly excessive sentence. The court emphasized that the Appellant clearly held a leading role in a sophisticated and large-scale cocaine distribution conspiracy, involving wholesale kilogram quantities over several months, using encrypted communications to facilitate criminal activity.

The court noted that the Appellant controlled the supply chain and had access to prohibited weapons intended to enforce the conspiracy. The seriousness of the firearms conspiracy justified a substantial sentence, reduced to reflect the guilty plea. The sentences on possession with intent to supply were within guideline ranges and concurrent sentences had minimal impact on the total sentence.

The court rejected the Appellant's assertions regarding the money counting machine and drivers as irrelevant to the overall sentence. The use of EncroChat was rightly considered an aggravating factor due to its role in thwarting law enforcement.

HHJ Coello had explicitly considered totality and mitigation, including guilty pleas and conduct on remand, resulting in a just and proportionate total sentence of 21 years. The court upheld the consecutive sentencing for distinct drug and firearm offences.

Holding and Implications

The court REFUSED the Appellant's application for an extension of time and leave to appeal against sentence.

The direct effect is that the 21-year custodial sentence imposed on the Appellant stands. No new precedent was established by this decision.