Mask and gloves led police to drugs after unpaid rent exposed tenant

The Court of Appeal has upheld a six-year prison sentence imposed on a man who possessed more than one kilogram of plant material mixed with synthetic drugs for supply to others, rejecting his appeal against both his conviction and sentence.

The case relates to the discovery of a large quantity of drug-laced plant material in a flat the man had rented. The substances were found on 5 July 2016.

Police discovered 1,117.1 grams of plant material containing 5F-AMB and FUB-AMB, along with a further 5.7 grams containing AB-FUBINACA and FUB-AMB.

The Larnaca Criminal Court convicted the man on all three charges he faced. It imposed six years in prison for possessing drugs with intent to supply them to others and six months for the illegal possession of the smaller quantity.

No separate sentence was imposed for possession of the larger quantity, as those facts were included in the charge of possession with intent to supply. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently, and the time the man had spent in pre-trial detention was to be taken into account.

DNA evidence linked man to drugs found in flat

According to the facts accepted by the trial court, the man rented the flat in 2014 for €300 a month and paid rent until April 2016. After the rent went unpaid, the landlord visited the property on 5 July 2016 to change the lock.

Inside the living room, the landlord found aluminium trays containing dried plant material. An electronic scale was also found on the kitchen counter.

Suspecting the material was drugs, the landlord contacted police. Members of the Drug Law Enforcement Unit (YKAN) arrived and searched the flat with the landlord’s consent.

Evidence collected at the property was examined by the Institute of Neurology and Genetics and the State General Laboratory.

DNA evidence played a key role in the case. An expert testified that the man’s genetic material was identified on a mask and inside both a right and a left glove found in the flat. Traces of plant material containing drugs were also detected on the gloves.

Investigators also found a box containing 2,000 black bags. A DHL delivery receipt for the package was issued in the man’s name.

The trial court concluded that these findings, together with the other evidence, showed that the man knew the drugs were in the flat and had possession of them.

Court rejected claim that he was in England

The man denied knowing about the drugs, arguing that he no longer lived in the flat and had handed the keys to his brother. His defence also claimed he had been in England during the relevant period.

The Court of Appeal found that his first ground of appeal relied on arguments already rejected by the trial court. The Criminal Court had assessed the testimony in detail and explained why it considered both the man’s account and those of two defence witnesses unreliable.

The appeal court found no error in the assessment of the evidence or the conclusions reached by the trial court. It therefore dismissed this ground of appeal as unfounded.

Request for computer expert also rejected

The man also argued that the trial court had wrongly refused to allow him to present evidence from a computer expert. The expert was intended to examine photographs submitted as evidence in support of the claim that the man had been in England at the time.

Court records showed that the defence had sought to call another witness, but the people approached had declined to testify. The defence then requested an adjournment to find a suitable expert, but the request was refused.

The Court of Appeal ruled that the decision not to grant an adjournment was not wrong. It noted that the trial court had examined the photographs and considered the claim that the man was outside Cyprus, while allowing him to present his arguments alongside the other evidence.

The appeal court found no evidence that the man had been denied a fair trial or had suffered prejudice as a result of the decision.

Six-year sentence not considered excessive

The man challenged the length of his sentences, describing them as excessive and legally incorrect. He cited his clean criminal record, personal and family circumstances, and the time that had passed since the offences without him committing further crimes.

The Court of Appeal found that the trial court had considered his clean record, personal circumstances and family responsibilities, including the fact that he was the father of a minor child. It had also taken into account the potential impact of his imprisonment on his family, including the difficulties his wife might face when visiting him in prison.

However, the trial court had stressed that personal circumstances carry limited weight when sentencing for offences of this nature, given the need to enforce the law effectively and protect society.

Regarding the passage of time, the Court of Appeal noted that most of the delay occurred before the man’s arrest. He was arrested on 4 June 2021, when he presented himself at the Deryneia crossing point intending to travel to the areas under Turkish occupation. A check revealed an outstanding arrest warrant issued on 7 February 2017.

The appeal court concluded that the trial court had considered all relevant factors, tailored the sentence to the case and given appropriate weight to mitigating circumstances. It had also taken into account the seriousness of the offences and the need for strict sentences to deter similar conduct.

The Court of Appeal dismissed all grounds of appeal concerning both the conviction and the sentences, upholding the original decision in full.

Also read: Missing body found at Nicosia morgue under wrong name
For more videos and updates, check out our YouTube channel