Tag Archives: Crown Court

Conveying Prohibited Articles into Prison – Suspended Sentence

conveying prohibited articles into prison suspended sentence
Senior crown court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier

Senior Crown Court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier recently represented a client charged with conveying prohibited articles into prison.  In this case it was cannabis and mamba, List A and List C items.

Sarah’s client was in a difficult position because the sentence for such offences is almost inevitably a prison sentence.   In this case his position was worse as he had been convicted before of a similar offence.  In that case he had received a six month prison sentence.  As a result, if convicted , prison would seem inevitable.

Detained with Cannabis and Mamba

Sarah’s client had attempted to enter Nottingham Prison with two wraps of what he thought was mamba in his underwear. He was stopped because a  sniffer dog indicated that he ought to be searched.  When the items were discovered he immediately said he believed it was mamba.  When it was tested only one wrap was found to contain mamba.   The other contained cannabis although the wraps looked very similar in appearance.

The difference was potentially important in terms of sentence.  Cannabis was a List A article, whereas Mamba was not.  The maximum sentence was 10 years in prison, whereas the penalty for a List C article was a fine.

The prosecution was persuaded that  Sarah’s client could be sentenced on the basis that he believed that he was bringing a List C article into the prison.  Despite his record the court was persuaded to adjourn the case for a pre-sentence report.

At our client’s request, we instructed counsel Ben Isaacs of 7 Bedford Row Chambers.  Following extensive mitigation  the Judge was persuaded that the inevitable prison sentence could be suspended.  He received an 8 month prison sentence suspended for 18 months with community elements because of these arguments.

The Current Law on Conveying Prohibited Articles into Prison

Once an individual had knowingly conveyed a package containing any prohibited article into prison he was criminally liable for the contents.   As a result, a person will bear the risk of a significant sentence even when they thought that they were bringing in a less serious, List C item.

Their belief is likely to be important mitigation, but cannot be a defence.

Contact Crown Court Litigator Sarah Lees-Collier

If you face an allegation of conveying prohibited articles into prison or any other criminal offence then please contact Sarah.  She can be reached at our Nottingham office on 0115 9599550 or alternatively you can contact her using the form below.

Contact

Deferred sentence in Class A drug supply case

deferred sentence possession with intent class a
Derby criminal solicitor advocate William Bennett

Derby criminal solicitor advocate William Bennett recently acted for a client facing sentence for allegations of possessing Class A drugs with intent to supply.  William’s representations helped secure a deferred sentence.

The starting point for sentence for supply of a single Class A drug after a trial is often in the region of four and a half years.  As a result, William’s client was at real risk of a significant prison sentence.

Two types of Class A drug

The case was unusual.  William’s client, a drug addict, had seen a drug dealer hide drugs in a public place.  He was intending to recover them later. Instead, our client stole the drugs. The drugs were both heroin and crack cocaine.  While he admitted that he would have used some of the drugs  himself, he would have sold some to other drug users for profit.

As set out above, the relevant sentencing guidelines would suggest an appropriate starting point of four and a half years.  This would be after trial.  William’s client had entered his guilty plea only on the morning of the trial.  As a result he would be entitled to a very limited reduction in sentence for his guilty plea.

William’s client had, however, used the delays in proceedings to put his life in order.  He had made massive strides towards becoming drug free and turning his life around.  On this occasion his offending was due to him succumbing to temptation in an opportunistic fashion.

Successful argument for a deferred sentence

As a result, William was able to persuade the Learned Judge to take the truly exceptional step of deferring sentence.  The Judge set our client various conditions to keep to prior to a sentencing later this year.

If he keeps to the conditions of his deferred sentence then he can expect, in due course, to receive a sentence that will not involve immediate custody.

The case was a good example of a robust but compassionate Judge being able to take an unusual course having heard cogent and well thought out submissions from the defence advocate in the case of a defendant who had demonstrated through his actions a determination to change his life completely.

Contact a Criminal Defence Lawyer

We provide advice and representation at the police station, Magistrates’ and Crown Courts across the country.  We have six offices based in the East Midlands.  If you face police investigation or criminal proceedings then you can find your local office here.

If you wish to contact William Bennett then please telephone him on 01332 546818 or email him using the form below.

Contact

Conspiracy to defraud sentencing leads to positive client feedback

conspiracy to defraud nottingham criminal defence
Senior Crown Court litigator Laura Clarson

Nottingham crown court litigator Laura Clarson recently represented a client who face an allegation of conspiracy to defraud.

Laura’s client had been originally charged with conspiracy to defraud together with her brother.  She also faced two separate charges of fraud.

The allegations were serious so although of good character there was a real risk of a prison sentence.

The Allegations

It was alleged that she was guilty of conspiracy to defraud because she had opened a bank account.  Into this account money obtained by fraud could be deposited.

The individual frauds were based on the fact that she was in possession of two pre-paid cards that had been opened fraudulently. Large sums had been transferred onto the cards and the cards had been used. Both cards were registered to her address.

Conspiracy to defraud – basis of plea

At court, our client was represented by Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant.  He was able to negotiate pleas to a limited number of charges.  More importantly he was able to negotiate a basis of plea so that the risk of a prison sentence was reduced.

The prosecution accepted pleas to the conspiracy and to converting criminal property.  The second charge was in relation to the bank account.  Additionally, Phil persuaded the Crown not to pursue the charges relating to the pre-paid cards.

The basis of plea limited her involvement in the conspiracy to a single transaction.  This accurately reflected our client’s admitted involvement in the conspiracy.

Mitigation for a Suspended Sentence

Following plea, Laura’s client had the benefit of a pre-sentence report prepared by probation.  Phil put forward mitigation emphasising her limited involvement, personal circumstances and her previous good character.  This led the Judge to decide he could suspend the prison sentence.

This was a very worrying time for our client so she was extremely relieved at being spared custody.  We were very pleased to be able to help her at a difficult time.

Positive Client Feedback

conspiracy to defraud client feedbackAlthough our staff don’t expect it, they are always pleased when they receive a ‘thank you’ from clients who are pleased with the outcome of their case or know that we have done all we can to secure the best outcome for them.

In this case, Laura and Phil’s client wished to go further so went to the trouble and expense of sending a card and flowers.
conspiracy to defraud positive client feedbackIn turn, we would like to wish our client all the best in the future and we hope that she is able to put what was an admittedly serious error of judgement behind her.

Contact Laura Clarson

Any Crown Court case will be serious so you will want a legal team who will fight to make sure you receive the best outcome.  In instructing Laura Clarson you will know that she will give your case the time and attention that it needs.

Please telephone Laura on 0115 9599550 or email her here

Historic Allegations Successfully Challenged

Senior Crown Court litigator Laura Clarson was instructed by a client facing historic allegations of serious sexual offences.  Counsel Vanessa Marshall of 7 Bedford Row chambers was instructed.

Historic Allegations

Laura’s  client had first arrested in 2013, aged 69,  for alleged sexual offences spanning a period of approximately 18 years from 1995 in relation to a single complainant.  The police and prosecution had initially decided that there was insufficient evidence to proceed as they had also gathered evidence in support of Laura’s clients denials.

A second complainant then made sexual allegations, albeit of quite a different nature, which led Laura’s client being charged with later offences.  A decision was then made that, absent any additional evidence, her client would be charged with the original allegations as well.

As a result of police enquiries, further historical allegations were made by another three complainants.  These allegations dated back as far as 1972.

Prosecution Failure to Disclose

historic allegations criminal solicitor
Crown Court Litigator Laura Clarson

All matters for the five complainants were tied into a single indictment and listed for trial before Derby Crown Court.  It became clear during the trial that the Crown had failed to disclose a substantial amount of material relevant to the case that had the potential to assist in our client’s defence.

It was impossible to consider properly this unused material so there was no alternative but for the trial to be adjourned to start afresh nine months later.

In the meantime, the prosecution chose to offer no evidence in relation to all of the allegations apart from those arising from the original investigation which had not been prosecuted.

Detailed Cross Examination on ‘Unused Material’

In readiness, counsel Vanessa Marshall  examined the additional material comprising years of medical, social services, school and counselling records.  This meant that lengthy cross examination of the complainant was needed.  This in turn led to a review of the case by the prosecution after this evidence had been challenged.

Not Guilty Verdicts on all Charges

historic allegations crime solicitor
The letter to Laura

The prosecution then chose to offer no further evidence against Laura’s client, who was by now aged 73, and invite not guilty verdicts.  The entire process had taken three years, during which time he had suffered ill health throughout.

Laura’s client took the time to write a letter thanking her for all that she had done and the manner in which he had been treated.

Contact Laura Clarson

Defending historic allegations is always difficult, but this case demonstrates that in instructing Laura Clarson you will know that your case is being given the time and attention that it needs.

Please telephone Laura on 0115 9599550.

On Trial for Serious Sexual Offence

Senior Crown Court Litigator Lisa Sawyer recently instructed Barrister Vanessa Marshall of 7 Bedford Row chambers.  The allegation of a serious sexual offence, and Lisa’s client was one of two defendant’s on trial.

Complainant Gave a Detailed Account

The prosecution case was that the complainant had been targeted in a nightclub by both defendants as she was drunk and vulnerable.  In evidence the complainant alleged that she only had a partial memory of leaving the club and what happened afterwards.  She maintained that she was not in control of her actions or in a position to consent to sexual contact owing to her intoxication.

The complainant was able to give the location of the flat that she had been taken to.   The co-accused was arrested and he gave the name of Lisa’s client.  Their mobile phones were seized and interrogated.  Photographs of the complainants underwear were recovered and a video footage of Lisa’s client having sex with the complainant who seemed to be asleep and wasn’t participating.  Further photos were found that did not show either defendant in a good light.  Further interrogation of the phones showed that the defendants were part of a Whatsapp group that publicised their sexual encounters and kept count.

Client Accepted Poor Conduct but not Rape

Lisa’s client and co-accused accepted being the two men involved, and accepted sexual activity in the night club.  They maintained that the complainant was not as intoxicated as she latter alleged.  A request for disclosure of CCTV from

outside the club supported this account.  Both men accepted having intercourse with the complainant.  They accept that there conduct in relation to the photos, filming and messages was distasteful and showed a lack of respect, they had not raped the complainant.  Detail they they could provide of the complainants personal circumstances could only have come from conversation with her, suggesting she was sober.

Phone Evidence Supported the Defence

Our client argued that the complainant arose out of regret after the fact.   There was evidence to show that she had spoken to a friend in the taxi back to her mothers, but had deleted that call record from her phone before the police could seize it.  She gave different accounts as to her recollection in her interviews and in her first description of events to those concerned in the investigation.

Although a trial for a sexual offence should be heard quickly, proceedings were prolonged.  The first trial concluded with a hung jury.  There was a second trial in December 2016 that resulted in both defendant’s being acquitted.

Client had Legal Aid for Sexual Offence Trial

The case had a number of complexities that counsel and Lisa identified.  With the benefit of legal aid, Lisa was able to:

  • Instruct a medical expert to comment on injuries seen to the complainant
  • A telecommunications expert who provided crucial evidence as to deleted calls and commentary on call history between her client and the complaiant
  • Instruct expert counsel to represent her client

Exemplary Character

Although counsel was from London chambers, Lisa knew that she would spend as much time as preparation of the case would entail.  Significant time was spent with our client in conference.  Lisa drafted a comprehensive defence statement dealing with every aspect of her client’s defence so that he could not be criticised at trial.  Her client’s instructions were eight pages long.  Lisa was able to secure a number of references that demonstrated her client’s exemplary character away from these proceedings.

Counsel fought extremely hard on behalf of Lisa’s client to secure this result and avoid a conviction and sentence that would have been measured in years.

Contact Lisa Sawyer

sexual offence criminal defence
Senior Crown Court Litigator Lisa Sawyer

Whatever the charge you face before the Crown Court, be it a sexual offence or other allegation, Lisa will be able to provide you with expert specialist legal advice, instruct the best advocates and secure any expert evidence necessary to assist you case.  Please telephone her on 0115 9599550 or email her here.

 

Conditional Discharge for Public Disorder

Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant

Nottingham Solicitor Advocate Phil Plant secured a conditional discharge for his client who was originally charged with affray before Nottingham Crown Court.  Two co -accused faced the affray charge and charges of assault occasioning actual bodily harm.  The case was prepared by senior crown litigator Caine Ward.

Late Night Incident in Drink

The incident took place in a fast food restaurant in Nottingham.  Both sides of the incident had been drinking after a night out in the city centre.  Phil’s client was with his parents and his uncle.

In the restaurant words were exchanged with the co-accused.  The CCTV obtained by Phil showed that his client had been involved in the early part of the incident.

As a result of his behaviour he was manhandled out of the shop by security staff.

In the meantime a melee broke out involving the co-defendants.   They assaulted our client’s father by punching him.  This led to him being knocked out by one co-accused and then whilst on the floor being stamped on by the other co-accused.

Phil’s client was still being restrained at his point, but made threats towards the co-defendants.

Plea to a Lesser Charge

The Crown accepted a plea from Phil’s client to an offence under s4 Public Order Act.  Phil negotiated this plea on the basis that our client had offered the threats after his father had been knocked out.

In relation to the incident as a whole, thankfully our client’s father made a full recovery.

Conditional Discharge Imposed

Following argument persuasive mitigation from Phil, the Recorder  was prepared to deal with his client separately from the two co-accused, ending the ordeal of court proceedings.  He felt able to take the very unusual step of imposing a 12 month conditional discharge.  If his client is in further trouble during the period of the discharge he can be re-sentenced for the original allegation and any fresh offence.  Otherwise the conviction is ‘spent’.

Contact Us

Often the prosecution and court need persuading to look at alleged offence realistically and sympathetically.  As a result you will need a persuasive specialist advocate.  If you wish to instruct us or seek initial advice then please telephone Phil or Caine on 0115 9599550 or email them here.

Sexual Activity with a Child Sentence

Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant

Nottingham solicitor advocate Phil Plant recently dealt with a serious case involving sexual activity with a child that required a sensitive presentation of mitigation to secure a just sentence for his client.  The preparation undertaken by senior crown court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier, including the request for a psychologist report, assisted greatly.

Sexual Activity with a Child

Phil’s female client had pleaded guilty to four offences of sexual activity with a child.  She had had a relationship with a teenage boy involving sexual contact.

The relationship had come to the attention of the boy’s mother.  She had contacted Phil’s client and told her of her son’s age.  She was instructed to end the relationship.  This advice was ignored and the relationship continued and moved to a sexual phase.

The boy had provided the police with a detailed victim impact statement describing how he felt that he had been made to grow up too fast.

Our Client was Vulnerable

In turn, Phil’s client presented as very vulnerable.  She suffered from learning impairment and a lack of social awareness.  She had suffered bullying at school and that had led to difficulties for her in forming peer to peer relationships.

In the view of her parents, and confirmed by a psychologist, she was less emotionally mature than her 15 year old sister.  In addition she had been diagnosed with epilepsy that on occasions left her with slurred speech.

Suspended Sentence Imposed

Phil had to approach the case with sensitivity.  The judge accepted that the offending fell within a sentencing bracket that had a starting point of 12 months for at least two of the offences.  The judge as persuaded, however, that taking into account all the personal mitigation a 16 month prison sentence could properly be suspended for 24 months.

Contact Us

If you face a serious case such as sexual activity with a child then you will need your case preparing and presenting by experienced lawyers with a view to securing the best outcome for you.  If you wish to contact Phil or Sarah then please telephone them on 0115 9599550 or email them here.

Prohibited Item into Prison Sentencing

Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant

Nottingham criminal solicitor advocate Phil Plant recently travelled to Northampton Crown Court to represent his client who was charged with conveying a prohibited item into prison.  The case was prepared by senior Crown Court Litigator Sarah Lees-Collier.

Prohibited Item Conveyed into Prison

Our client had arranged a visit to see her boyfriend in prison.  At the same time she had arranged to convey a mobile telephone and a quantity of the substance spice that at the time had been a legal high.  It has now been made illegal.

The drop was intercepted at the visits area, having been caught on CCTV.  Suspicions had been aroused when our client was seen passing her baby to her boyfriend.  The baby was reluctant to be passed over.  As this was taking place the swap was noticed.  The items were then seized.

Early Instructions

Phil took instructions from  his client. She maintained that she felt that her boyfriend was under pressure from people inside the prison.  She had made repeated attempts to bring it to the attention of the authorities including writing to her local MP.  These problems were largely ignored save that the defendant was moved prisons.  Within days of the defendant being moved her was viciously attacked and left with a noticeable scar.  It was a result of this attack that she felt under compulsion to take the item in to the prison.

Phil gave early realistic advice that all of this information might be effective mitigation, but would not provide her with a defence to bringing a prohibited item into prison. She accepted this advice and entered a guilty plea at her first Crown Court appearance.

Suspended Sentence Imposed

The Judge was initially prepared to adjourn for reports, and once all of the necessary information was before the court the sentencing Judge was prepared to suspend what was an inevitable prison sentence.  The decision was based on the effective mitigation that Phil was able to put before the court.

Contact Us

Crown court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier

It will be important to you that you receive early advice that allows you to out your best case before the court, whether that is the Magistrates’ or Crown Court.  If you face proceedings, please contact Phil or Sarah on 0115 9599550 or email them here.

Aggravated Burglary Trial Success

VHS Fletchers were recently instructed to act for two of three defendants appearing before Nottingham Crown Court facing trial for serious allegations of aggravated burglary,  knife-point robbery and kidnapping.   One of our clients also faced an additional serious charge of wounding with intent.

Nottingham Crown Court Trial

The nature of the charges was such that if convicted the defendants would have faced sentences of more than ten years in prison.  They were relieved to be found not guilty of all charges.

The case was prepared for trial by Serena Simpson and Siobhan McGuinness from the firm’s Chesterfield and Derby offices.   Although the case was at Nottingham, these offices were more local to our clients.  One of our clients was represented by one of our team of in-house solicitor advocates William Bennett.  Our second client was represented by experienced counsel Stuart Lody from a local specialist chambers.  William had to take the lead on the advocacy as his client was first on the Indictment.

Aggravated Burglary

The trial ran for eight days.

The central issue in the case became the credibility of three prosecution witnesses who were said to be either victims or witnesses to the offending.

Following well prepared and skillful cross examination William and Stuart established that a number of significant lies had been told by tose witnesses.

Cross-examination of Untruthful Witnesses

The cross-examination was based on a through understanding of the statements in the case as well as the material that the prosecution had chosen not to use.  This was made possible because comprehensive and detailed instructions on all aspects of our clients’ cases had been taken at an early stage to prepare for trial, followed by an active pursuit of relevant unused material.

The cross-examination was able to establish that not only were there significant inconsistencies between the accounts given by the eye witnesses but also that the accounts differed from earlier accounts given by the same witnesses.

The prosecution’s main witness in relation to the knife-point robbery was forced to admit that he had lied to the police and even more worryingly that he had lied on oath to the jury about who was present at the time of the alleged robbery.  This  lead the Judge  to direct the Jury to acquit two of the defendants in relation to that particular charge.

Prosecution Witness Revealed as Drug Dealer

In another interesting development one of the witnesses conceded that the main prosecution witness to the wounding allegation did indeed sell cannabis as had been maintained by our clients throughout, a fact that had been denied by the witness in question.

It was a trial that really emphasised the importance of trial by Jury and the robust testing of evidence during the trial process. Anyone who believes that prosecution witnesses always tell the truth would have had their eyes opened by this case.

There was an enormous amount of pressure on the defendants throughout the case, pressure that only lifted after the Jury returned its verdicts. The firm’s overall approach, however, assisted the defendant’s to withstand the pressure that comes with being accused of crimes that they had not committed.

Instruct VHS Fletchers

If you face allegations, whether aggravated burglary  or  a different charge, it will be important to you.  As a result it is important that you instruct solicitors who will ensure that your best case can be put before the court.  If you wish to discuss a case with William or Siobhan please contact them on 01332 546818.  Our Chesterfield office can be contacted on 01246 387999.  Specific or more detailed enquiries can be made here.

Vulnerable Client Avoids Custody

Nottingham based in-house counsel Steve Gosnell and senior Crown Court litigator Sarah Lees-Collier worked together to ensure a constructive sentence was imposed on a vulnerable client at Nottingham Crown Court.

Serious Offences

Their client was initially to be sentenced for two allegations of sexual activity with a child. He was 19 at the time of the allegations, but the victim was only 13.

Our client had learning difficulties and Attention Deficit Hyperactivity Disorder (ADHD), and in the past had problems with alcohol and drug use.  This combination of factors had led to previous incidents of self-harm.

Steve’s client maintained that they were in a consensual relationship. He accepted advice that this believe did not provide him with a defence and guilty pleas were entered at an early stage of proceedings.

In the meantime our client was charged with an allegation of Assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm (ABH).  This was a serious joint attack on an immigrant.  The incident was captured on CCTV.  This showed our client kicking the victim and putting him headlock whilst on ground as part of a sustained group attack.

Again, following advice, he pleaded guilty in the Magistrates’ Court and his case was committed for sentence.  The two others involved were younger than our client.  They were also sentenced but received periods of detention.

Expert Psychologist Report

Sarah correctly identified that the court would benefit from a report dealing with his personal difficulties.  A report was obtained from a psychologist with expertise in dealing with young children and immature adults.

This report was shared with the Probation officer writing the pre-sentence report.  This led to a recommendation of  a suspended sentence including community activities.  Our client had helped himself by voluntarily attending and alcohol treatment program.

Constructive Sentence

Steve made detailed representations about categorisation of both the sexual offences and assault matter.  It was argued that the aggravating features could be properly balanced against our client’s immaturity and the level of his intellectual function.

As a result, the Judge felt able to step away from an immediate custodial sentence and instead suspend sentence with onerous but constructive community elements.  The sentence would operate to protect the public in future by reducing the risk of any repetition of offending.

Contact Steve Gosnell or Sarah Lees-Collier

If you have a case that you wish to discuss with Steve or Sarah then please telephone them on 0115 9599550.  Alternatively you can email Steve here or email Sarah here.