Poca Solicitors recently represented a client in relation to Encrochat Poca Proceedings before Liverpool Crown Court relating to a previous conviction for Conspiracy to Supply Class A drugs. Poca Solicitors took over the case at the Confiscation stage from previous solicitors where the Defendant had pleaded guilty and received a sentence of 23 years.
The Crown argued the benefit figure was an eye-watering £28,914,057.14 and that there were assets, some hidden, forming a total alleged available amount putting the case in the bracket of a sentence in default, for non payment, of up to 7 years under S.10 of the Serious Crime Act 2015.
The defendant was represented by Will Southcott Founder and Managing Director of POCA Solicitors together with Mr Richard Pratt KC Head of 7 Harrington St Chambers. Following the advancement of several novel legal arguments relating to apportionment and benefit calculations, particularly as regards Encrochat Poca cases, the Crown agreed to settle the case at a figure which will leave the Defendant facing a default sentence of a maximum 3 years. In addition, however, given the assets already seized by the Crown, once they are sold the Defendant will only be looking at a sentence in default of around 2 years if no further payments can be made in respect of the Confiscation figure.
Mr Will Southcott commented ‘Working with Mr Pratt KC was an absolute pleasure. He embraced the new arguments on apportionment based inter alia on ancillary judicial comment in the case of R v Ahmad [2014] UKSC 36 and it was clear the Crown were worried about those arguments being successful in this Court or even the Higher Courts which would have affected Poca Confiscation cases, particularly those involving Encrochat evidence, both in the future and, perhaps of more concern to the Crown, those cases already dealt which could be subject to review.’
Mr Pratt KC also managed to secure a further reduction in the sentence in default by successfully arguing that by ultimately settling the Confiscation Proceedings the Defendant should be entitled to credit in relation to his sentence in default. That was a new one to even us as well as the Presiding Judge however it worked which was fantastic news for our client.