Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2003]JRC205

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

13^th November, 2003.

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Kevin Bernard Doublet

 

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the Defendant was remanded by the Inferior Number on 10^th October, 2003, following a guilty plea to:

 

2 counts of:

Possession of a controlled drug, with intent to supply contrary to Article 6 (2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978: Count 1: cannabis resin; Count 2: MDMA.

Admitted breach of a 1 year Probation Order made by Magistrate's Court on 22^nd November, 2002, on guilty pleas to 1 count of being drunk in charge of motor vehicle and 2 parking offences.

Admitted breach of an 80 hour Community Service Order made by Magistrate's Court on 28^th July, 2003, on guilty pleas to 3 motoring offences and breach of 22^nd November, 2002, Probation Order.

 

Age:     38.

 

Details of Offence:

A warrant was executed at the Defendant's shared flat and one incomplete nine bar of cannabis resin was located in the drawer of his bedside table.  A rucksack containing four complete nine bars of resin wrapped in cling film, together with four paper wraps each containing 10 ecstasy tablets and one wrap containing 9 tablets, were also found.

The Defendant was arrested at other premises and found to be carrying £145.00 cash.  He admitted to being a regular user of ecstasy and cannabis and to receiving the rucksack two weeks previously knowing that it originally contained 5 nine bars of cannabis resin and the ecstasy.  He stated that he was looking after the drugs for someone and was due to return the bag and receive some form of cash payment for minding them.  He stated that he had done the same on one previous occasion.  The total amount of cannabis seized weighed just over one kilo, with a street value of between £4,765.00 and £5,331.00.  The 49 ecstasy tablets, worth £10.00 each, had a street value of £490.00.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, full co-operation with police from early stage, regular employment, remorse, impulsive character suffering depression, no previous drug convictions.

 

Previous Convictions:

Various previous convictions including four drink driving offences (for one of which he was still under Probation).

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	16 months' imprisonment (starting point: 2 years').
Count 2:	4 years' imprisonment (starting point  7 years'); concurrent.

 

Breach of 22^nd November, 2002, Probation Order: 3 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

Community Service Order, made on 28^th July, 2003 to be discharged.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

 

 

 

C.M.M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. Bell for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        The Defendant has pleaded guilty to 2 counts of possession with intent to supply, one relating to just under 2 kilograms of cannabis resin and one to 49 tablets of ecstasy.  In each case he said that he was acting as a "minder" and would receive a fee when he returned the drugs to the dealer; but as the Court has said on many occasions everyone who plays a part in the train of distribution is engaging in drug trafficking and is helping to spread the scourge of drugs.  A minder often plays a significant part in that process.  The Defendant is also in breach of Probation for driving offences.

2.        We must first consider the starting point.  The Crown has taken 7 years which is the minimum suggested starting point.  Mr Bell argued we should go below this to 6 years, and in particular, has referred to the case of A.G. -v- Perry and Bevan (10^th October, 2002) Jersey Unreported [2002/190].  We regard that case as being exceptional and it may well be that the defendant was leniently dealt with.  We see no reason in this case to go below the normal minimum of 7 years and that is the starting point we take.

3.        In mitigation the Defendant has pleaded guilty and was co-operative.  Although he has previous convictions he has none for drug offences.  We have considered carefully the Social Enquiry Report and we note in particular that he has been in regular employment and has maintained his children over the years.  We have also carefully considered his letter and we note his remorse at what he did.

4.        Nevertheless, in our judgment the Crown has made full allowance for all this mitigation from the starting point of 7 years. 

5.        Accordingly the sentence is as follows; count 1, 16 months'; count 2, 4 years', concurrent.  For the breach of Probation (namely the driving with excess alcohol) 3 months' concurrent as the Crown has suggested having regard to the totality principle making a total of 4 years' imprisonment.  The disqualification from driving will of, course, remain.  We discharge the Probation Order.  We discharge the Community Service Order and order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

A.G. -v- Perry & Bevan (10^th October, 2002) Jersey Unreported; [2002/190].

Campbell and Ors [1995] JLR136.

A.G. -v- Welsh (3^rd February, 2002) Jersey Unreported; [2000/21].

Bonnar & Noon -v- A.G. [2001} JLR626.

A.G. -v- Ashworth (25^th January, 2002) Jersey Unreported; [2002/24].