Jersey Unreported Judgments

2000/46

3 pages

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

10^th March, 2000

 

Before:    M.C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and

                                                      Jurats de Veulle and Le Breton

 

 

The Attorney General

 

-v-

 

Jason Mark Chevalier

 

13  counts of:   obtaining property by false pretences (counts 1-13);

1 count of:       attempting to obtain property by false pretences (count 14).

 

Age:  24.

 

Plea:  Guilty

 

Details of Offence:

 

Chevalier obtained a stolen cheque book belonging to an old school friend and tendered 14 cheques on the account to a total value of £1,828.50 over a 10 day period in December, 1998.  Offences were aggravated by being committed against an old school friend and breach of Binding Over Order.  Normally prosecution would move for 18 months' imprisonment concurrent on each count.

 

Details of Mitigation:

 

Guilty plea.  Comparative youth.  Accused had expressed remorse to his counsel.  This was his first long custodial sentence and it was said that accused has resolved not to continue as previously.  Argued that the delay was such that real prejudice was caused because he would have received a concurrent sentence had these matters been dealt with at the same time as the charge of grave and criminal assault on 3^rd September, 1999.  Also submitted that the totality of the sentence was too high.

 

Conclusions:

 

9 months' imprisonment on each count; sentences to run concurrently, but to follow on consecutively sentence of 30 months' imprisonment for other offences passed by the Royal Court on 3^rd September, 1999, (see Jersey Unreported Judgment of that date).

 

Sentence & Observations of Court:

 

3 months' imprisonment, concurrent, on each count, to follow consecutively sentence imposed on 3^rd September, 1999.

 

The Court had no doubt that had the matter come up with the charge of assault, consecutive sentences would have been imposed.  Noted that this was first lengthy custodial sentence and comparative youth.  Most of all, however, Court took the view that the delay should be taken into account because these offences had been hanging over the accused for too long.  As an act of mercy conclusions reduced.

 

 

The Attorney General.

Advocate N.J. Chapman for the Accused.

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:  We have no doubt that had this case come before the Royal Court at the same time as the grave and criminal assault - which we believe it should have - consecutive sentences would have been imposed.  The number of dishonest offences totalling over £2,000 would, we feel, have attracted a separate sentence which would have been consecutive to an offence for grave and criminal assault. 

 

However, we have listened carefully to what has been said in this case.  We have heard from counsel for the defendant that this is the first lengthy sentence of imprisonment and that it has caused Chevalier to reflect on the course of his life.  We take into account his comparative youth and the fact that he has pleaded guilty.  But most of all we take into account the question of delay which the Attorney has most fairly and accurately set out for us.

 

We have also had regard to the totality principle and to the fact that, through no fault of Chevalier, this matter has been hanging over him for a very long time.

 

In the circumstances we think there must be a consecutive sentence but as an act of mercy and because of the delay we are going to reduce the conclusions slightly.  Stand up, please, Chevalier.  You will be sentenced to three months' imprisonment, concurrent, on all these charges but those sentences are to follow consecutively the sentence you are already serving.  In other words you are sentenced to an extra three months' imprisonment.

 

 

 

Authorities

 

 

AG -v- Chevalier, Riant (3^rd September, 1999) Jersey Unreported.

 

AG -v- Apperley (7^th February, 1997) Jersey Unreported.