Drugs Supply Offences

The main offences relating to the misuse and supply of controlled drugs are contained in the Misuse of Drugs Act 1971. The sentence that follows is linked very closely to the Class of drug that was supplied. Class A, B or C, are set out in Parts I, II or III of Schedule 2 to the Act.

Once there is evidence of a controlled drug, the following are the key offences:

Possession of Drugs

These are low-level offences where the prosecution need only prove that there were controlled drugs which were in the possession of another. The meaning of possession is set out in case-law and is generally accepted to mean "custody and control". Sometimes the Prosecution/Police may agree to deal with these offences by way of a caution if representations are drafted.

Possession with Intent to Supply

The Prosecution must prove the above but also that the Defendant had an intent to supply it to another. This is more difficult, the Prosecution will normally seek to do this by evidence of quantity, cash seized, paraphernalia, tick-lists and telephone evidence. The Prosecution will often charge Being Concerned in the Supply where they are not able to prove actual possession. Supplying includes distributing (section 37(1) of the Act) and does not require proof of payment or reward.

One key matter with supply offences is to ensure the sentencing guidelines are approached correctly. Through a basis of plea, this can mean that a custodial sentence, which may have seemed inevitable, can be avoided.

Production and Cultivation

It is also an offence to produce or cultivate a controlled drug. Again, the sentencing guidelines can be vitally important in these cases as they are often quite clear in terms of the strength of the evidence. It is therefore important to limit sentence so that a custodial sentence, or worse deportation, are avoided.

Technical Evidence

Rhys has extensive experience in dealing with cell-site evidence, co-location evidence and ANPR tracking data. Rhys is not afraid to challenge the police and prosecution when they put forward their analysis, which is often wrong and occasionally misleading. Rhys does not simply accept the prosecution's evidence at face value; he will look at the raw data and advise you on whether to consider instructing an expert to provide an independent analysis of the evidence.

Rhys also regularly challenges the drafting and admissibility of Streamlined Forensic Reports (SFRs). These ordinarily deal with purity, finger-prints and DNA. These are a new area of law and should not simply be accepted, the Prosecution should be asked to do a thorough job and produce expert evidence in this respect.

Conspiracies and Co-Defendants

In cases involving drug offences, clients are often charged alongside others. It is important to take a sensible but robust approach to co-accused, Rhys is very familiar with these tactical decisions and will advise you of the various options – whilst being unafraid to challenge other suspects on their conflicting accounts. Rhys is very experienced in dealing with legal argument to determine exactly what role should be attributed to a defendant, rather than being willing to simply accept a prosecution case in full.

A conspiracy is where there is an agreement between one or more persons. In a conspiracy, the Prosecution need not prove the conspiracy (or plan) was actually put into effect - it is the agreement which is the offence.