CONSPIRACY

[2019] EWCA Crim 2145

[2019] EWCA Crim 2145
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Jacobs J, Judge Munro QC)
5 December 2019

When dismissing an appeal against a conviction for conspiracy to corrupt, the Court of Appeal made general observations on the purpose and nature of the summing-up of facts and the scope of a trial judge’s task in that respect.

[2019] EWCA Crim 2052

[2019] EWCA Crim 2052
CA (Crim Div) (Fulford LJ, Nicklin J, Sir Kenneth Parker)
26 November 2019

An individual’s conviction for two counts of conspiracy to cheat the public revenue were safe. Although there had been failures in the prosecution’s disclosure process, they had not been in bad faith and they had been cured by the time of the trial. The prosecution had also been entitled not to investigate further the allegation that there had been another conspirator, due to insufficient evidence against him.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1881

[2019] EWCA Crim 1881
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, William Davis J, Sir Kenneth Parker)
25 October 2019

A total sentence of 12 years’ imprisonment, comprised of consecutive sentences of seven years for five offences of human trafficking and five years for four offences of supplying drugs, was appropriate for a 21-year-old offender considering his relative youth and the fact that he had no real criminal history.

[2019] EWHC 2821 (QB)

[2019] EWHC 2821 (QB)
QBD (Stewart J, Master Brown)
24 October 2019

Charges of conspiring to evade the prohibition on the importation of firearms and ammunition in contravention of the Customs and Excise Management Act 1979 s.170(2) fell within Class F, not Class B, of the Table of Offences listed in the Criminal Legal Aid (Remuneration) Regulations 2013 Sch.1 Pt 7.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1863

[2019] EWCA Crim 1863
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, William Davis J, Jefford J)
24 October 2019

When refusing an application by service defendants to dismiss criminal charges brought against them in the Court Martial, a judge advocate general had erred in concluding that the Armed Forces (Court Martial) Rules 2009 r.25(3) provided a stand-alone or residuary jurisdiction at the arraignment stage. Also, under r.26, proceedings were to be conducted comparably to proceedings conducted in the Crown Court and, if unable to determine how such proceedings would be conducted, in the interests of justice.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1835

[2019] EWCA Crim 1835
CA (Crim Div) (Simon LJ, Cockerill J, Judge Bate)
15 October 2019

A sentence of 32 years’ imprisonment for conspiracy to supply Class A and Class B drugs was replaced with one of 30 years. The overall criminality, which involved highly sophisticated conspiracies, justified a sentence of 30 years but not above.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1734

[2019] EWCA Crim 1734
CA (Crim Div) (Hamblen LJ, Sweeney J, Moulder J)
3 October 2019

An appeal against a conviction for conspiracy to commit violent disorder was allowed because there was a real risk that the conviction was unsafe in the light of the confusing and potentially misleading directions given by the trial judge in answer to a jury question.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1542

[2019] EWCA Crim 1542
CA (Crim Div) (Hickinbottom LJ, Carr J, Andrews J)
15 August 2019

Custodial sentences of 12 months imposed on two young women who had pleaded guilty to being involved in the staged robbery of a betting shop were quashed and replaced with shorter suspended sentences where the judge had not properly considered the complex personal circumstances and strong mitigating factors in both cases.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1318

[2019] EWCA Crim 1318
CA (Crim Div) (Gross LJ, McGowan J, Butcher J)
23 July 2019

A company was denied leave to appeal against its conviction for conspiracy to corrupt even though two directors who had constituted its “directing mind and will” (DMW) were not present at trial and did not give evidence. Their absence did not render the trial unfair, given that a company was a separate legal entity and there was no rule of law or practice which required a DMW to be indicted with the company or to be available at trial to give evidence.

[2019] EWCA Crim 1192

[2019] EWCA Crim 1192
CA (Crim Div) (Hamblen LJ, Lewis J, Judge Picton)
20 June 2019

It was not permissible for a sentencing judge to reflect the aggravating feature of an offender’s absconding by reducing the credit for his guilty plea.

Scroll to top