R v Peter Masih & Anor

R v Peter Masih & Anor

The sentencing judge was entitled to impose uplifts outside the money laundering guideline range to reflect the underlying large-scale commercial drug conspiracy. The sentences imposed were not manifestly excessive given the scale, harm, and personal mitigation, and the appeals against sentence are dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Peter Masih; Appellant: Mandeep Singh; Respondent: Rex
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
10 March 2025
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Money Laundering, Sentencing, Drug Offences
Criminal Law Conspiracy Money Laundering Sentencing Drug Offences

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Peter Masih

Appellant

Mandeep Singh

Appellant

Rex

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentences imposed for conspiracy to conceal, convert, disguise or transfer criminal property were manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judge erred in applying uplifts outside the guideline range for money laundering offences
  3. 3 Whether the correct category of harm and culpability was applied under the sentencing guidelines

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge was entitled to impose uplifts outside the money laundering guideline range to reflect the underlying large-scale commercial drug conspiracy. The sentences imposed were not manifestly excessive given the scale, harm, and personal mitigation, and the appeals against sentence are dismissed.

Court Disposition

appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeals against sentence dismissed
  • No further reports required under section 33 of the Sentencing Act 2020