Criminal Barrister Graham Gilbert represents drugs dealer arrested following on from Operation Fortress
13th March 2018
3PB Criminal barrister Graham Gilbert represented a defendant accused of intending to supply drugs to a value of £250,000. The case was heard in Winchester Crown Court.
For more information about the case, please click here.
Related News
-
3PB’s criminal law barrister Kate Davies, pictured here, has already successfully defended two different clients in two separate Crown Court trials for assault this month. Kate’s first client was charged with assault. The alleged assault was caught on CCTV. The defence was accident, and the case involved the cross-examination of four witnesses. The jury acquitted the defendant unanimously in less than an hour. Kate was instructed by Kate Green of Renshaw Derrick and Co Solicitors....
Continue reading -
3PB's crime and regulatory barrister Nicholas Cotter has successfully appealed the imposition of a 30-year minimum term for murder, which had been witnessed by a very young child. The case involved the use of knife resulting in a brutal killing on a public street. The full court were persuaded that whilst this was a significant case of its type the enhancement of the minimum term due to the presence of the child was excessive. The...
Continue reading -
3PB Barristers is delighted to confirm another strong set of results for its Crime and Regulatory Crime team in Chambers and Partners’ 2026 edition published today. While the team retains its Band 1 ranking for Crime in the Western Circuit, with 9 of its practitioners ranked in this area of law; and maintains its 3 individual rankings for Health and Safety in the same Circuit, it welcomes a new ranking for Financial Crime in the...
Continue reading -
3PB criminal law barrister Nate Lara (pictured here) has been successful in the Court of Appeal, arguing that the original sentence imposed in the Crown Court was manifestly excessive and wrong in principle. The defendant received a sentence of imprisonment of 30 months. Nate argued that despite the aggravating features the sentence was excessive, going outside the range in the relevant sentencing guidelines, without sufficient justification for doing so. Nate also argued that the court...
Continue reading
