Drugs offences Defence Barrister Secure your defence Contact Charlie now

Drugs offences Defence Barrister

Defend complex drug conspiracies with authority. Charlie commands courtrooms in high-stakes supply, importation, and trafficking cases. Proven expertise dismantling covert surveillance evidence and challenging prosecution theories in multi-defendant trials.

Contact Charlie

Serious Drugs Offences – Strategic Defence for High-Stakes Cases

Drug trafficking and supply allegations carry severe custodial sentences and devastating consequences for careers and families. Whether facing county lines conspiracies, large-scale importation, or organized crime charges, you need a KC with proven authority dismantling complex prosecution cases. Charlie Sherrard KC has defended serious drug offences for decades, securing acquittals in multi-defendant trials involving millions of pounds worth of Class A drugs.

Why Instruct Charlie Sherrard KC for Drugs Offences?

Mastery of complex conspiracy cases
Charlie excels in multi-handed drug supply conspiracies involving numerous defendants, encrypted communications, and sophisticated criminal organizations. He understands how to challenge joint enterprise, prove innocent association, and demonstrate lack of knowledge or participation.

Expert at dismantling surveillance evidence
Modern drug prosecutions rely heavily on covert surveillance, phone evidence, and encrypted messaging. Charlie has extensive experience challenging the admissibility and interpretation of surveillance evidence, exposing gaps in the Crown’s case, and presenting alternative innocent explanations.

Proven success in importation trials
From commercial importations through ports and airports to personal importations, Charlie understands customs law, search powers, and knowledge requirements. He challenges identification of substances, disputes quantities, and exposes weaknesses in chain of custody evidence.

Strategic approach to guilty pleas
Where the evidence is overwhelming, Charlie provides candid advice on pleading guilty to reduced roles or lesser charges, then secures the shortest possible sentence through powerful mitigation addressing addiction, exploitation, and realistic prospects of rehabilitation.

Areas of Expertise

  • Conspiracy to supply Class A drugs – cocaine, heroin, crack, MDMA organized distribution networks
  • Commercial importation – container loads, concealed shipments, postal importations
  • County lines operations – exploitation of vulnerable runners, cross-border supply chains
  • Cannabis cultivation – industrial grows, electricity abstraction, modern slavery defences
  • Encrypted communications – EncroChat, Sky ECC, challenging decryption evidence
  • Covert surveillance – phone evidence, tracking devices, undercover officers
  • Money laundering – proceeds of crime allegations linked to drug trafficking
  • Drug driving offences – defending cannabis and cocaine driving charges

Recognition and Results

Band 1 Crime Silk – Chambers UK Bar Guide (13 consecutive years)
Leading Silk in Serious Crime – Legal 500

Charlie’s reputation in serious drugs cases stems from securing acquittals in conspiracies where co-defendants were convicted, reducing sentences through compelling mitigation, and successfully appealing drug convictions based on legal errors.

Frequently Asked Questions About Drug Offence Defence

What is the difference between possession and possession with intent to supply?
Simple possession is having drugs for personal use—maximum sentence 7 years for Class A. Possession with intent to supply (PWITS) means having drugs intending to supply them to others—maximum life imprisonment. Intent is inferred from quantity, packaging, cash, scales, phones, and messages. Even small amounts can be PWITS if evidence suggests dealing.
What is a drug conspiracy charge?
Conspiracy to supply drugs means agreeing with others to supply controlled drugs. You can be convicted even if no drugs were actually supplied, if the prosecution proves the agreement existed. Defending conspiracies requires challenging your role, knowledge of the agreement, and whether you withdrew before offences occurred.
Can I be convicted if the drugs weren't found on me?
Yes. Drug conspiracy convictions are often based on phone evidence, surveillance, financial records, and co-defendant testimony rather than recovered drugs. The prosecution must prove you were part of the supply chain through evidence of communications, meetings, cash movements, or association with known suppliers.
What are county lines operations?
County lines refers to urban drug dealers expanding into smaller towns using mobile phone "lines" to take orders. Vulnerable children and adults are exploited as runners and street dealers. If you've been exploited, modern slavery and duress defences may apply. Charlie has experience defending both organizers and exploited participants.
What sentences do drug offences carry?
Class A supply sentencing depends on your role and quantity: Leading role (14+ years), Significant role (7-14 years), Lesser role (4-7 years). Importation and production carry higher sentences. Class B cannabis supply typically ranges from community orders to 6 years depending on role and scale.
How do police intercept encrypted messages?
Major police operations like EncroChat and Sky ECC involved hacking encrypted phone networks used by organized criminals. Charlie challenges the admissibility of this evidence, questions attribution (proving you used the specific device), and disputes interpretation of coded messages.
What is the drug dealing test for phones?
Phones are examined for messages showing supply activity: "You got any?", tick lists, customer debts, owed drug debts. The prosecution argues these prove supply. Defence strategies include challenging phone attribution, demonstrating innocent explanations, or proving messages relate to personal use or debt collection, not supply.
Can I argue I was forced to deal drugs?
The defence of duress requires proof you were threatened with immediate death or serious harm if you didn't participate. It's a difficult defence requiring credible evidence. More common is mitigation arguing exploitation, addiction, debt bondage, or vulnerability that led to involvement—seeking reduced culpability rather than acquittal.

This site uses essential cookies to make is work and analytics cookies to understand how you interact with it. It also uses cookies to remember your preferences and improve your experience. Learn more