Jersey Unreported Judgments

 2001/78

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

30th March, 2001

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Colin Anthony Trenear

 

First Indictment

 

4 counts of:

possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 6(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978. Count 1: heroin. Count 2: cannabis. Count 7: cannabis. Count 8: heroin.

 

2 counts of receiving stolen property (counts 3, 12).

 

[On 23rd  February 2001, the Crown abandoned the prosecution on counts 4, 5, 6, 9, 10, 11, 13, 14 and 15 of the Indictment]

 

Second Indictment

 

1 count of:

possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 6(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978: Count 1: cannabis resin.

 

Age:     34.

 

Plea:    Guilty.

 

Details of Offence:

First Indictment:

On execution of a warrant at the defendant's home on 11th December, 2000, cannabis totalling 31.5 grams was found [count 2].  The defendant informed officers he had thrown a £20 bag of heroin on to the fire when police entered the property [count 1].  On execution of a drugs warrant at the defendant's home on 9th June, 2000, officers found a personal amount of cannabis [count 7].  The defendant admitted having taken heroin regularly since February [count 8].  The defendant admitted smoking cannabis for about 15 years and abusing heroin six months before the execution of the December 2000 warrant.  At the time of the execution of 9th June, 2000 warrant, officers found three antique clocks [count 3] and a Toshiba TV/video [count 12].  The clocks were the proceeds of a burglary in September 1999 and the TV/video had been stolen from Woolworths.  The defendant admitted buying clocks for £300 from a named person and the TV/video for £50 from an unknown person in a public house.

 

Second Indictment:

On the execution of a drugs warrant at the defendant's home on 6th December 2000, officers found 1.19 grams of cannabis.  On all three occasions other drug related paraphernalia was found at the defendant's home.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Credit for guilty plea, although quite late in proceedings.  The defendant admitted receiving antique clocks which saved the owner, who was an elderly lady, from having to give evidence.  Had been open with police; effectively wrote his own indictment for both heroin charges which could not have been brought without admissions; he would not have received clocks had he known personal circumstances of owner; contended he did not know value of clocks; he was not organised professional handler; he was remorseful.  Although some offences were committed on remand, it was difficult for a drug offender not to offend if on lengthy remand.  The collapse of his business leaving insurmountable debts had led defendant to drugs.  Despite troubled early background, defendant has sought help from the Drug and Alcohol Advisory Service; had a loving relationship with partner; the children had not been exposed to drug paraphernalia and would not be visiting him in prison.  Defendant had some convictions but lengthy break in offences of dishonesty.  Total sentence would be excessive.

 

Previous Convictions:

Number of convictions between 1984 and present date, two of which include possession of Class B drugs between 1995 and 1999.  Previous dishonesty offences included failing to pay Social Security contributions in 1997.

 

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Count 1:	4 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent, with count 1.
Count 3:	6 months' imprisonment
Count 7:	2 weeks' imprisonment.
Count 8:	6 months' imprisonment, concurrent with count 7, consecutive to counts 1 and 2.
Count 12:	6 months' imprisonment, concurrent with count 3, consecutive to counts 1, 2, 7, 8.

 

Second Indictment:

 

Count 1:	2 weeks' imprisonment, consecutive to sentence moved for on First Indictment.
TOTAL:	1 year, 4 months and 2 weeks' imprisonment.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted, except for counts 3 and 12, on which counts concurrent sentences of 4 months' imprisonment were passed.

 

TOTAL:

1 year, 2 months and 2 weeks' imprisonment.

 

 

The Solicitor General.

            Advocate C.R.G. Deacon for the Defendant.

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

THE BAILIFF:

1.        Trenear, you are a reasonably intelligent young man.  You have wasted your life so far.  You have betrayed your girlfriend and you have set an appalling example for your small children.  If you continue to expose your children to a drug ridden environment you will risk losing them altogether because the Court will not willingly tolerate the continuation of that state of affairs.  You have the ability to make something of your life and you have only to find the willpower to do it and to make it happen.

2.        The Court has listened very carefully to the submissions made very ably on your behalf by your Counsel and we are going to reduce slightly the conclusions in one respect in relation to the receiving counts, counts 3 and count 12. We are going to sentence you to 4 months' imprisonment instead of to 6 months' imprisonment, but in other respects we think that we must impose a custodial sentence and the conclusions are accordingly granted and you will be sentenced as moved for by the Solicitor General, subject to the amendment which I have mentioned, making a total of 14 months' and 2 weeks' imprisonment and drugs will be forfeited and destroyed.

Authorities

A.G.-v-de la Haye and Kearney (15th December, 1995) Jersey Unreported.

A.G.-v-A. & H. (11th February, 2000) Jersey Unreported [2000/26].

Thomas: Principles of Sentencing (2nd Ed'n): pp. 169-170.