March 2, 2015

Judge persuaded not to impose 5 year minimum jail sentence – firearms accused receives a 2 year suspended sentence

A Stafford man represented by Sheppards Solicitors avoided a mandatory minimum term of imprisonment when the Judge dealing with the case was persuaded to find exceptional circumstances not to impose the minimum sentence.

Under Section 5(1a)(a) of the Firearms Act 1968, anyone found in possession of a firearm disguised as another item faces a minimum mandatory sentence of five years.

In this case, the police received information as to the whereabouts of various weapons. They subsequently recovered an air weapon, a knuckleduster (classed as an offensive weapon) and a Taser device disguised as a torch. When tested by experts the Taser was said to have emitted 24,000 volts.

Sheppards Solicitors commissioned an independent expert report to assist in the case.

The client, represented by Mark Nicholls pleaded guilty to possessing the disguised firearm and also to possessing the offensive weapon.

It was argued that the Taser at the time of seizure was not in working order although it was capable of future activation. Combined with other factors, this was capable of amounting to exceptional reasons. The Judge agreed and following a request under the principles of R v Goodyear indicated a sentence of two years imprisonment.

The Judge then heard further submissions with a view to suspending the sentence and not passing an immediate custodial term. The Judge agreed that the case was suitable for such a course of action. The sentence imposed was therefore two years imprisonment, suspended for two years.

The client, not only relieved was understandably delighted with the outcome of the case.