R v Warren ; R v Beeley

JurisdictionEngland & Wales
JudgeTHE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE
Judgment Date22 June 1995
Judgment citation (vLex)[1995] EWCA Crim J0622-8
Date22 June 1995
CourtCourt of Appeal (Criminal Division)
Docket NumberNo. 94/4285/Y5

[1995] EWCA Crim J0622-8

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL CRIMINAL DIVISION

Before: The Lord Chief Justice of England (Lord Taylor of Gosforth) Mr Justice Rougier and Mrs Justice Ebsworth

No. 94/4285/Y5

94/5015/Z3

Regina
and
John Barry Warren
Geoffrey Terence Beeley

MR LOUIS FRENCH appeared on behalf of THE APPELLANTS

MR DAVID PAGET QC and MISS EMMA BROADBENT appeared on behalf of THE CROWN

1

Thursday 22 June 1995

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICE
2

THE LORD CHIEF JUSTICEThese two appeals have been listed together since they both concern the proper approach to sentencing for offences involving a prohibited Class A drug known as MDA or Ecstasy. In Arunguren and others 16 Cr App R(S) 211, this court gave guidance as to the sentencing approach and criteria for offences involving heroin and cocaine, but in the absence of sufficient evidence declined to do so in relation to Ecstasy. In the instant cases we have had the advantage of receiving evidence from Mrs Gillian Connors, a Senior Officer with Her Majesty's Customs and Excise with extensive experience in the drugs field and presently a research analyst with the National Co-ordination Unit. We have also had oral evidence from Dr King, the Head of the Drugs Intelligence Laboratory at Aldermaston. From that evidence it emerges that Ecstasy is the collective and simple name given to three different drugs, each being a complex including amphetamine: MDA, MDMA and MDEA. All three are Class A controlled drugs. They broadly have similar effects. They are hallucinogenic stimulants and there is evidence that they can, in some situations, cause fatality.

3

There was evidence which was recited in R v Slater and Scott (CA 2.2.95) showing that the drugs are capable of causing convulsions, collapse, hyperpyrexia, intravascular coagulation and acute renal failure. Those physical effects on the consumer may not be the only adverse effects of the drugs, which may very well affect the behaviour of the consumer in relation to others.

4

Ecstasy drugs have no clinical value and therefore all manufacture of them must be illicit and must be designed to produce drugs which offend against the legislation. The Ecstasy drugs seized in the United Kingdom come frequently from the Netherlands or Belgium, as well as other places, but there are illicit laboratories producing those substances in the United Kingdom. The drug usually comes in the form of a well-made tablet. There are capsules, but those are less common. Sometimes, though rarely, the drug comes in the form of loose powder. Dosage units vary between a content of 75 milligrams or 125 milligrams of the active constituent, but most tablets, we are informed, contain amounts close to the average of 100 milligrams. Accordingly, 5,000 tablets would be expected to contain a total of 500 grammes of the active constituent. From the manufacturer's point of view, the achievement of 100 milligrams or thereabouts is desirable: if less than that were included the tablet would be less marketable, and if more than that were included, then it would be more than is necessary or appropriate for an individual dose and the manufacturers would be unlikely to wish to exceed what was necessary for that purpose.

5

In the case of powders the number of equivalent tablets can be calculated from the knowledge of the purity of the powder and the assumption that tablets will contain 100 milligrammes or thereabouts of pure substance. The remainder of the tablet, apart from the active constituent, is made up of an inert binder, often a substance called lactose. Although not routinely carried out, there are no technical difficulties in the quantitative determination of the drugs content of either tablets or powders, whether by analysis of each individual tablet or the whole content of the powder or by sample.

6

There was also evidence before us that seizures of Ecstasy by Customs and by the police since 1989 have greatly increased. In 1993 there were over 2,000 seizures made by the Customs authorities and the police, the effect of which added up to a total of over 2.5 million doses. The seizures which were made are accepted to be only a fraction of the total amount available in the United Kingdom. The growth in the number and quantity of the seizures since 1989 points to an increase in the organisation and scale of operations in regard to that drug. Although over half of all the Ecstasy seizures was in the London area, there have been significant seizures elsewhere. The drug is readily available in all the major cities in the United Kingdom. That indicates that its importation and distribution are well organised. Individual seizures have been made of as large a quantity as 252 kilogrammes —almost one million doses.

7

The range of Ecstasy prices at street level is variable. The price varies considerably depending upon a number of factors such as the number of doses being purchased, the relationship between the buyer and the seller and the place of purchase. Because Ecstasy has become so widely available during the past few years the price has dropped considerably. In 1990 the national average price per tablet was £21. That dropped to £16.50 in February 1994 and has since further dropped to £13. Thus, if street value were to be a major criterion in determining the level of sentencing, the more Ecstasy imported the lower would be its value and the lower would be the level of sentencing. This would clearly be contrary to public policy. It was this factor which prompted the court to alter the criteria in its guidance as to offences involving heroin and cocaine in Arunguren. Since that case regard should be had to the weight of the drug, rather than to its street value.

8

We consider the same applies to Ecstasy....

To continue reading

Request your trial
51 cases
  • R v Morris (Harold Linden)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • Invalid date
  • R v Hurley
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 28 Julio 1997
  • R v John Paul Allan Michael BUNTING
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • 22 Febrero 2002
    ...point of fourteen years and upwards is too high. He submits that more assistance is to be obtained from the case of Warren and Beeley [1996] 1 Cr App R 120 than Bilinski. 9 However, we are unable to accept that submission. In the course of giving the judgment of the Court in that case Lord ......
  • R v Mashaollahi (Behrooz)
    • United Kingdom
    • Court of Appeal (Criminal Division)
    • Invalid date
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT