2002/8
ROYAL COURT
(Samedi Division)
11th January 2002
Before: |
M.C. St. J. Birt, Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Quérée and Allo. |
The Attorney General
-v-
John Peter Le Mière.
5 counts of: |
Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 6 (1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978: Count 1: cannabis resin. Count 2: ecstasy. Count 6: cannabis resin. Count 7: cannabis. Count 12: cannabis. |
2 counts of: |
Receiving, hiding, or withholding stolen property (counts 3, 4); |
1 count of: |
Speeding, contrary to Article 31A (1)(aa) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 (count 5); |
2 counts of: |
Holding a telephone whilst vehicle in motion, contrary to Article 25 of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 (counts 8,11); |
1 count of: |
Common assault (count 9). |
1 count of: |
Dangerous driving (count 10). |
[On 21st September, 2001, the Crown withdrew count 8];
[On 14th December, 2001, the Crown withdrew count 4; on 14th December, 2001, count 9 was altered
from grave and criminal assault to common assault].
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
Counts 1, 2 and 3: On 21st April, 2001, Le Miere was stopped by police officers and was found in possession of a stolen bracelet and ring (value £315.00). Following Le Miere's arrest, police officers conducted a search of his home premises and located three lumps of cannabis resin (6.17g) and two ecstasy pills. Le Miere explained that he had purchased the jewellery from an unnamed individual in a public house locally.
Counts 5, 6, and 7: On 4th May, 2001, Le Miere was stopped by police officers for driving in his motorcar at an excessive speed, namely 43 mph in a 30 mph zone. A search of the vehicle revealed a lump of cannabis resin (4.18g). A subsequent search of Le Miere's home premises revealed a further lump of cannabis resin (2.18g).
Counts 9, 10, 11 and 12: On 30th June, 2001, when Le Miere was observed by plain-clothed police officers acting suspiciously in his vehicle, officer DS Aubert approached Le Miere's vehicle and appears to have surprised Le Miere by opening the driver's door. Le Miere's reaction was to accelerate at speed away in a dangerous manner with no regard to the officer's safety and on coming traffic. The officer's arm became caught and the officer was dragged for approximately four yards at speed until the driver's door, swung open. Minimal injuries. Le Miere did not realise the individual was a police officer.
Le Miere was arrested by police, in his vehicle, 10 minutes later but prior to the arrest, was observed to use his mobile telephone whilst driving his vehicle.
Following Le Miere's arrest a subsequent search of his home premises revealed a further lump of cannabis resin (453mg).
Details of Mitigation:
Long-established drug user. Guilty plea to common assault, in the place of the earlier count of grave and criminal assault avoided an Assize Trial.
Previous Convictions:
Numerous.
Conclusions:
Count 1: |
2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent with other sentences, but consecutive to sentence passed on count 9. |
Count 2: |
4 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent with other sentences and with sentence passed on count 9. |
Count 3: |
2 weeks' imprisonment, consecutive. |
Count 5: |
£65 fine or 4 days' imprisonment in default of payment, concurrent |
Count 6: |
2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent with other sentences, but consecutive to sentence passed on count 9. |
Count 7: |
2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent with other sentences but consecutive to sentence passed on count 9. |
Count 9: |
6 weeks' imprisonment. |
Count 10: |
4 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Count 11: |
£50 fine or 3 days' imprisonment in default of payment, concurrent. |
Count 12: |
2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent with other sentences, but consecutive to sentence passed on count 9. |
TOTAL: 12 weeks' imprisonment.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
The Crown's conclusions were considered to be generous. However, bearing in mind that Le Miere was currently in custody for more serious offences, the Court granted the Crown's conclusions.
Advocate B.H. Lacey, Crown Advocate.
Advocate Mrs S.A. Pearmain for the accused.
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. It was fortunate that the police officer's arm came free so quickly and that no further injury was caused, but we accept that you did not know that it was a police officer.
2. The conclusions in this case could be said in all the circumstances to be on the low side, but we are willing to grant them and, therefore, the sentence is as follows: On count 9, six weeks' imprisonment; on count 10, 4 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent; count 3, two weeks' imprisonment consecutively; on counts1, 6, 7 and 12, 2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent with each other, and concurrent with the sentence on count 2, which is 4 weeks' imprisonment but those to be consecutive to the others, in other words a total of 12 weeks' imprisonment. On count 5 we fine you £65 or 4 days' imprisonment in default, on count 11 £50 or 3 days' imprisonment in default. Those default sentences to be concurrent with each other and concurrent to the other sentences and we order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.
No Authorities