Jersey Unreported Judgments

 2001/45

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

22^nd February 2001

The Attorney General

-v-

Richard Alan Steven Cousins

Breach of a 2 year Probation Order, made by the Royal Court on 10th December, 1999 (see Jersey Unreported Judgment of that date) following a guilty plea to possessing with intent to supply and supplying cannabis resin and to supplying MDMA.

Age:     19

Plea:    Guilty, breach of probation order admitted.

Details of Offence:

Given a package containing 67 ecstasy tablets, which he was to deliver back to the giver at a pub..  Defendant knew that male was a commercial dealer.  Did it for no gain.  Value of drugs: £792-£990 (street value), £396-£660 (wholesale)

Details of Mitigation:

Youth; only held drugs for a short time; had made efforts to stay free of drugs; remorse.

Conclusions:

3 years' youth detention (starting point; 7 years; 4 years' deduction for guilty plea, youth etc.); 1 month's youth detention consecutive re breach of probation order (had completed 180 hours of 240 hours' community service order; totality born in mind).

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted; 7 years' starting point correct.

Advocate S.E. Fitz, Crown Advocate.

Advocate A. Mursell for the accused.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Cousins, in December, 1999, this Court took the exceptional step of placing you on probation for two years for dealing in Class A drugs and you were warned of the consequences if you re-offended.  Sadly, you are once again before the Court for possession with intent to supply 67 ecstasy tablets.

2.        Your counsel has raised a number of matters in mitigation, namely your youth, your guilty plea, and the circumstances of the offence when it is said that you were only minding these drugs for a short while with no benefit or reward to yourself.  You have clearly made efforts to stay free of drugs during your time on probation and it is said that you committed this offence in a moment of stupidity when under stress.

3.        We have reminded ourselves of Article 4 of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law, 1994 because of your age but we are satisfied that a non-custodial sentence cannot be justified because of your failure to respond to the earlier non-custodial sentence and because the offending is so serious that a non-custodial penalty cannot be justified.

4.        With reference to the part that you played we remind ourselves of what the Court said in the case of A.G. -v- McCool & Heys (9th March, 2000) Jersey Unreported, namely "that everyone who plays a part in the distribution process of controlled drugs, whether as courier, minder, or in some other rôle, forms a vital link in the distribution chain."

5.        We accept that the Crown was correct to take a starting point of 7 years.  We take account of all the matters which we have mentioned and the other mitigation available in the papers but we think that the deduction of 4 years by the Crown reflects that.  Accordingly the sentence of the Court is that you are sentenced to 3 years' youth detention on count 1, and 1 month's youth detention consecutive for all the offences for which you were placed on breach of probation and we must warn you that when you are released you may be subject to a period of supervision.  We further order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

A.G. -v- McCool & Heys (9th March, 2000) Jersey Unreported.

A.G. -v- Such (9th June, 1999) Jersey Unreported.

A.G. -v- Cousins (10th December, 1999) Jersey Unreported.

A.G. -v- Mulholland (13th September, 1999) Jersey Unreported.