Jersey Unreported Judgments

 2001/86A

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

20^th April, 2001

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Adam Lee Passman

 

 

2 counts of:	common assault (count 1,2);
1 count of:	offering to supply a controlled drug contrary to Article 5 (b) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978. count 3: Ecstasy
2 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug contrary to Article 6(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978. count 4: cannabis resin. count 5: ecstasy.
1 count of:	Being concerned in the supplying of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978. count 6: cannabis resin.

 

[A not guilty plea to count 6 was accepted by the Crown]

Breach of a 1 year probation order, made in the Magistrate's Court on 19^th October, on a guilty plea to 1 count of reckless or dangerous driving (count 1) and 1 count possession cannabis (count 3).

[On counts 2 and 4 (exceeding the speed limit), £200 and £150 fines with 3 months' disqualification and 1 month's disqualification or 7 days' imprisonment in default of payment, respectively was imposed]

Age:     22                    

 

Plea:    Guilty; Breach of probation order admitted.          

 

Details of Offence:

At approximately 0210 hours on Saturday 5^th December 2000, Passman approached a group of people who were leaving licensed premises.   None of them knew Passman and, therefore, were total strangers to him.   He approached them and offered to supply them with ecstasy tablets.   The members of the group rejected his offers and tried to distance themselves from him by walking away.   Passman persisted in his attempts to supply members of the group and, despite their efforts either verbally or by simply walking away from them, he persisted. The group's rejection of his offers appeared to have made him agitated and, without provocation or warning, he then attempted to punch one of the members of the group. He fortunately missed (Count 1).  He then punched another member of the group, striking him twice in the face and head, whereupon Passman was restrained on the ground until the Police were called, who promptly arrived and arrested Passman.   Upon arrest, he was found to be heavily intoxicated. When searched at Police Headquarters, he was found to be in possession of 1.29 grammes of cannabis which had a value of £7.   A  Drugs Warrant search was undertaken at his home address and Passman handed over 12 ecstasy tablets. When subsequently interviewed, Passman stated that he had consumed a combination of alcohol and ecstasy and, after consuming 6 pints and 6 double spirit chasers together with 2 or 3 ecstasy tablets, he had no recollection of events which gave rise to the 2 assaults or his subsequent arrest.   He admitted possession of the ecstasy tablets at his home address and stated that they were the remainder of 15 tablets that he had purchased approximately 1 week earlier for £10 per tablet.  He denied that he had intended to supply any of those tablets.   According to the Prosecution drug expert, the tablets had a street value of between £144 and £188, and a wholesale value of between £72 and £120. In consequence of these offences, he was in breach of a Probation Order made by the Magistrate's Court in October 2000. The Prosecution, in line with the authorities cited to the Court, had taken a starting point of 6 years' imprisonment and had equated the offence of offering to supply with cases of possession with intent to supply.

 

Details of Mitigation:

He had entered guilty pleas at an early stage and had also been co-operative, particularly in handing over the tablets to the Police Officer at the first opportunity when they were at this home address.   Despite his level of intoxication, he was co-operative and immediately accepted responsibility for his behaviour.   He accepted what the witness had said.  When sober, he had no idea why he had offered to supply the strangers with ecstasy tablets.   It was suggested that his behaviour was that of the anti-social activities of a drunk and at the lower end of the scale of offering to supply.  There was no previous history of commercial involvement in drugs and, clearly, this incident was not in any way pre-planned.   He acknowledged that he had behaved obnoxiously and described his behaviour as shameful.  He expressed remorse for his behaviour and character references were provided.   He had previously been in full employment and his work was still available to him.   He was an immature young man who had not previously received a custodial sentence.  It was suggested that probation and the attendance upon the SMART Course might be a viable option and alternative to custody.   He had completed 20 of the previous 50 hours Community Service ordered as part of the Magistrate's Court Probation Order.

 

Previous Convictions:

4 previous appearances, mainly for motoring offences, including offences of excess alcohol and reckless or dangerous driving, and other offences of an assault on an Honorary Police Officer and possession of cannabis.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	3 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	3 months' imprisonment.
Count 3:	2 years' imprisonment.
Count 4:	1 month's imprisonment.
Count 5:	2 years' imprisonment, all concurrent.

 

Breach of probation order.

Count 1:            7 days' imprisonment.

Count 3:            7 days' imprisonment.

Concurrent, but consecutive to sentence passed on main indictment.

TOTAL:             2 years' and 1 week's imprisonment.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Passman had offered to supply ecstasy tablets to complete strangers and, when they declined, he took a swing at one and struck another.

Count 1:	3 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	3 months' imprisonment.
Count 3:	2 years' imprisonment
Count 4:	1 month's imprisonment.
Count 5:	9 months' imprisonment, all concurrent.

 

Breach of probation order.

Conclusions granted.

TOTAL: 2 years' and 1 week's imprisonment.

 

J.C. Gollop, Esq., Crown Advocate

Advocate C.M. Fogarty for the Defendant

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.     Passman, you offered to supply ecstasy tablets to complete strangers and when they demurred you took a swing at one of them and successfully punched another.   Fortunately you were so affected by the combination of alcohol and ecstasy which you had taken that they had little difficulty in detaining you until the police arrived.  It was then found that you had some 12 ecstasy tablets at your home.

2.     In mitigation it is said that this was not something which was planned.  You are not charged with possession of the ecstasy with intent to supply it.   The Crown have accepted that it was for your personal use, but that you acted on the spur of the moment by offering to sell some tablets when you were under the influence of both alcohol and ecstasy.  You did not have them on you and therefore it was not a very practical offer.   You entered a very early guilty plea which stands you in good stead and you are still only 22, which also goes to your credit.   We have read the reference which has been supplied, and it is clear that you have a good work record. We have also read the letter from you and we accept from that that you are remorseful.  Nevertheless, this was an incident which cannot be overlooked.  You are in breach of a probation order already made.  You have been given a chance by the Court but you have not taken advantage of it.   We see no alternative to a custodial sentence and we feel that the Crown has made generous allowance in the conclusions which it has brought.

3.     We therefore propose to grant the conclusions with one alteration.   On count 1, 3 months' imprisonment; count 2, 3 months' imprisonment; count 3, 2 years' imprisonment; count 4, 1 month's imprisonment. On count 5, possession of ecstasy, we think it wrong to impose a sentence of 2 years', i.e. the same as that for an offer to supply on count 3, and the sentence will be 9 months' imprisonment.   All of those to be concurrent.  We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs in relation to those offences. We also grant the Crown's conclusions, namely 7 days imprisonment on each of the two charges on which you are in breach of the Magistrate's Court probation order, concurrent with each other but consecutive to two year sentence and we discharge the probation order.

 

Authorities

Campbell & Ors. -v- A.G. (1995) JLR 136 CofA.

A.G. -v- Postill (2^nd October, 1995) Jersey Unreported; [1995/192].

A.G. -v- Cooper (1^st September, 2000) Jersey Unreported; [2000/173].

A.G. -v- Gouveia (1^st December, 2000) Jersey Unreported; [2000/239].