R v Jordan, Alleyne and Redfern
| Jurisdiction | England & Wales |
| Judge | Mr Justice Douglas |
| Judgment Date | 14 December 2004 |
| Neutral Citation | [2004] EWCA Crim 3291 |
| Court | Court of Appeal (Criminal Division) |
| Docket Number | No: 0405986 A4 Case No 0405055 A3 |
| Date | 14 December 2004 |
[2004] EWCA Crim 3291
Lord Justice Rose
(vice President Of The Court Of Appeal, Criminal Division)
Mr Justice Douglas Brown
Mr Justice Mackay
No: 0405986 A4
Case No 0404162 A9
Case No 0405055 A3
IN THE COURT OF APPEAL
CRIMINAL DIVISION
Royal Courts of Justice
Strand London, WC2A 2LL
MRS A LUCKING appeared on behalf of the APPELLANT JORDAN
MR C BAUR appeared on behalf of the APPELLANT ALLEYNE
MR D ALEXANDER appeared on behalf of the APPELLANT REDFERN
MR N BLEANEY appeared on behalf of the CROWN
THE VICE PRESIDENT: Mr Justice Douglas Brown will give the judgment.
Mr Justice Douglas BROWN: The cases of Andrew James Jordan, Carl Anthony Alleyne and Dave Christopher Redfern have been listed and heard together because of the change brought about in the law in respect of possession of firearms by section 287 of the Criminal Justice Act 2003. Section 51A is inserted following section 51 of the Firearms Act 1968. It provides that the section applies where an individual is convicted of an offence under, in this instance, section 5(1)(aba). Secondly, the section provides that:
"The court shall impose an appropriate custodial sentence (or order for detention) for a term of at least the required minimum (with or without fine) unless the court is of the opinion that there are exceptional circumstances relating to the offence or to the offender which justifies not doing so."
Subsection (4) provides that in the case of an offender over 18 when convicted, the required minimum term is 5 years.
In the case of Jordan and Alleyne a sentence of 5 years' imprisonment was passed in circumstances we shall shortly mention. In the case of Redfern, the judge found exceptional circumstances and passed a sentence of 2 1/2 years. That sentence is challenged on behalf of Redfern on the basis that the judge was wrong in some of his remarks in sentencing to which we will turn.
Taking these individual cases in turn, Jordan is 25 years of age. On 1 September 2004 in the Crown Court at Leicester, he pleaded guilty to an offence of possessing ammunition without a certificate and possessing a prohibited firearm. On 22 September 2004 His Honour Judge Head sentenced him to 18 months' imprisonment (for possessing ammunition without a certificate), concurrent to the sentence on count 2 (possessing a prohibited firearm) for which he was sentenced to 5 years' imprisonment. His application for leave to appeal against sentence was referred to this court by the Registrar and we have today granted leave.
The circumstances briefly were these. On 29 June 2004 police officers visited the appellant at the Leicester Royal Infirmary where he worked as a security guard. They had a search warrant because they believed he had a firearm at his home address. When asked about the weapon he said he did not know what they were talking about, but he was perfectly cooperative. The appellant was taken to his home which was searched and a package was recovered from under a television. It comprised a bag which contained a pillowcase which, in turn, contained a holster which had in it a Smith and Wesson revolver together with cleaning equipment. The weapon dated from the second world war.
The weapon was loaded with four 0.38 calibre Smith and Wesson bullets. It was subsequently test fired and found to be in perfect working order. One of the bullets was test fired and found to be live. It was presumed the others were as well.
When interviewed, the appellant said that he had had the gun for about six months. He had agreed that the weapon had been hidden, but he did not know much about it as he had been given it by a cousin. He had looked after the weapon unwillingly. He had thought of disposing of it, but he thought that touching it would leave his finger prints and he did not want to leave it buried. The cousin was arrested but as the gun bore no DNA or finger prints and he gave a "no comment" interview no proceedings were taken.
The appellant was of previous good character. Supporting his mitigation a number of references were put forward by friends and family which, in summary, conveyed the message that he was a reliable and hard working person who was trustworthy and responsible. We will turn shortly to the submissions made on behalf of Jordan when we have reviewed the circumstances of the other cases. The judge found that there were no exceptional circumstances and that is not the subject of any challenge.
Alleyne was convicted on 4 June 2003 at Greenwich Magistrates' Court of one offence of possessing ecstasy; one offence of possessing a prohibited weapon in public; and one of possessing a bladed article. He was sentenced to an 80-hour Community Punishment Order.
On 22 April 2004 at the Crown Court at Woolwich he pleaded guilty to an indictment which alleged that he possessed a prohibited firearm, count 1; count 2, possessing ammunition without a firearm certificate; and there was a breach of a Community Punishment Order for which no separate penalty was imposed. He received 5 years' detention in a Young Offender's Institution for possessing a firearm and 12 months' detention for possessing the ammunition. Various concurrent sentences were passed in respect of the matters for which the magistrates had committed him to the Crown Court for sentence. The total was 5 years' imprisonment.
The appellant has a number of previous convictions: 1999, common assault; 2003, possessing a class A drug, possessing an offensive weapon in public and possessing a bladed article. He was given in total a Community Punishment Order of 80 hours. He has a more recent conviction.
Before the learned judge and before us, Mr Baur, his counsel, submitted that the circumstances in which he came by the firearm and had possession of it did amount to exceptional circumstances. In summary those were that he had been dealing in drugs and working for a drug dealer. The drug dealer had possessed the hand gun in question which he had hidden in woodland. The appellant had decided to leave the drug scene. When he informed the drug dealer of this he was told that there was no question of him doing that and if he tried to stop he would be killed because he knew too much. His solution was to go to the woodland, recover the gun which he kept in his possession for about a week before his arrest. His intention was to prevent the gun being used against himself. He had a vague notion, according to his counsel, that he would use the gun to protect himself if need be. The judge rejected that submission and found that there were no exceptional circumstances.
In the case of Redfern he pleaded guilty at the Crown Court at Kingston-upon-Thames on 13 July 2004 to one count of possessing a prohibited firearm. He was sentenced on 3 August 2004 by His Honour Judge Hawkins to 2 1/2 years' imprisonment. He appeals against sentence by leave of the single judge.
On 10 May 2004 police officers attended the appellant's home with a search warrant in relation to a wholly unrelated matter. During a search of the bedroom they found a bag on top of the wardrobe. Inside the bag was a box which contained a pistol. In a separate location, but nearby, was a handbook for the weapon which is a Brunei SRL gun. When asked about the weapon, the appellant said, "It's mine. I bought it off a bloke 3 years ago and I think it's an imitation".
Although the weapon had a magazine, there was no ammunition. He was arrested. The weapon was examined. It had been modified so that...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Director of Public Prosecution's Reference (Number 6 of 2019) - Ian David Price
...[39] of R v Corr. A finding of exceptional circumstances will be “rare”, see paragraph [30] of R v Jordan, Alleyne and Redfern [2004] EWCA Crim 3291. f) The circumstances are exceptional for the purposes of Article 70 if it would mean that to impose five years’ imprisonment would result in ......
-
HM Advocate v McGovern
...LR 876 R v BlackallUNKUNK [2005] EWCA Crim 1128; [2006] 1 Cr App R (S) 22; [2005] Crim LR 875 R v Jordan, Alleyne and RedfernUNKUNK [2004] EWCA Crim 3291; [2005] 2 Cr App R (S) 44; [2005] Crim LR 312 R v McEneaneyUNKUNK [2005] EWCA Crim 431; [2005] Cr App R (S) 86; [2005] Crim LR 579 R v Me......
- R v Amar Ali
-
R v Peter Ralphs
...the maximum sentence was 10 years' imprisonment. Although the minimum sentence is not subject to any discount for a guilty plea ( R v Jordan and others [2005] 2 CAR (S) 44) the maximum sentence should normally be discounted. 26 In short, therefore, the effect of statute in the vast majority......