Allan & Ors, R. v

Allan & Ors, R. v

Appellants should have been sentenced as enthusiastic foot soldiers in a conspiracy to supply a Class C drug, not as prime movers in a conspiracy to rob; the starting point of 12 years was too high given the offence admitted.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Scott Allan; Appellant: Syedhaidar Ali Gilani; Appellant: Paul Danny Bisset; Appellant: Robert Charles Brandon; Appellant: Mathew Robert May
Jurisdiction
England and Wales
Judgment Date
18 April 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
appeal allowed
Legal Topics
Conspiracy, Drug Offences, Sentencing, Appeal
Criminal Law Conspiracy Drug Offences Sentencing Appeal

Source-derived case record

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 2 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Scott Allan

Appellant

Syedhaidar Ali Gilani

Appellant

Paul Danny Bisset

Appellant

Robert Charles Brandon

Appellant

Mathew Robert May

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Was the starting point of 12 years imprisonment too high for conspiracy to supply a Class C drug?
  2. 2 Were the appellants wrongly sentenced as prime movers rather than foot soldiers?
  3. 3 Should the indictment have reflected conspiracy to rob and burgle as well as supply?

Ratio Decidendi

Appellants should have been sentenced as enthusiastic foot soldiers in a conspiracy to supply a Class C drug, not as prime movers in a conspiracy to rob; the starting point of 12 years was too high given the offence admitted.

Court Disposition

appeal allowed

Orders

  • Sentences of eight years imprisonment quashed.
  • Allan, May, Brandon and Bisset sentenced to four years imprisonment.