Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2004]JRC149

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

31^st August 2004

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Francis Martin Sullivan

 

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the Defendant was remanded by the Inferior Number on 16^th July, 2004, following a guilty plea to:

 

1 count of:

Possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply, contrary to Article 6(2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978. Count 2 ecstasy.

 

[On 16^th July, 2004, the Crown decided not to proceed with count 1 of the indictment.]

 

Age:     38

 

 

Details of Offence:

The defendant, who is from Kent, was followed when he arrived at the airport by police, and later was found to have 2,011 tablets of ecstasy in a bag in his hotel room.  He was subsequently arrested in town.  He remained absolutely silent in interview.  He however pleaded guilty at the first opportunity.

The tablets had a street value of £20,110 and a wholesale value of between £12,066 and £16,088.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea at indictment; devoted to ill wife and new-born baby; only one previous drug conviction.

 

Previous Convictions:

One drug offence - possession of cannabis.  Actual bodily harm, 2 fraud offences, 6 theft offences 3 offences relation to the counts, one offence of preventing the lawful and decent burial of a dead body.

 

Conclusions:

 

 

Count 2:

5½ years' imprisonment.  (Starting point:  10 years).

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

 

 

 

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

Advocate C.M. Fogarty for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

 

THE BAILIFF:

1.        Sullivan has pleaded guilty to the possession with intent to supply of 2,011 tablets of ecstasy.  This was from his perspective an entirely commercial transaction.  He was indebted, he claims, to a drug dealer in relation to his consumption of cocaine, and he agreed to bring the ecstasy to Jersey for delivery to another person whom he was not prepared to name.

2.        According to him a drugs debt of £1,000 was due to be forgiven.  The ecstasy tablets had a street value, in Jersey, of approximately £20,000.

3.        Sullivan is a mature man who entered this transaction with the dealer with his eyes open and in full knowledge of the likely consequences if he was caught.

4.        The Crown Advocate has taken a starting point of 10 years' imprisonment.  Defence counsel agrees that that is the appropriate starting point on the authorities and we also concur. 

5.        In mitigation, Sullivan did plead guilty to the offence at the first available opportunity and he is, as moved by the Crown Advocate, entitled to the full remission of one-third in respect of that plea.  That plea was not inevitable.  We have taken into consideration all the other matters set out in the social enquiry report and the difficult circumstances of his early life.

6.        We think the Crown Advocate has taken full account of all the mitigating circumstances in his conclusions.  The conclusions are granted and you are sentenced to 5½ years' imprisonment, and we order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

Bonnar & Noon -v- AG [2001]JLR626.