Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2004]JRC151

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

31^st August 2004

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Seamus Joseph Ryan

 

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the Defendant was remanded by the Inferior Number on 30^th July, 2004, following a Guilty plea to:

 

1 count of:

Being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs & Excise (Jersey) Law 1999. Count 1: MDMA.

 

And following taking into consideration of two similar offences of contravening Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs & Excise (Jersey) Law 1999, pursuant to the Criminal Justice (Taking of Offences into Consideration) (Jersey) Rules, 2000.

 

Age:     33.

 

Details of Offence:

The defendant imported 3,061 tablets of ecstasy through the Airport in a rucksack.  When stopped by a Customs Officer, he immediately admitted he was carrying the drugs.  He also admitted the offence during interview, as well as two further offences of importing ecstasy - one of about 1,000 tablets, and one of about 2,000 tablets.  He admitted that he was importing the drugs to pay off drug trafficking debts in the Island.

The 3,061 tablets of ecstasy had a street value of £30,610, and a wholesale value of between £18,366 and £24,488.  The tablets concerned in the offences taken into consideration had a street value of about £30,000 and a wholesale value of between £18,000 and £24,000.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Exceptionally co-operative, especially in relation to the offences taken into consideration.  Pleaded guilty at earliest opportunity despite no forensic tests having been carried out.  No drugs convictions, past good work record.  Alcoholic.

 

Previous Convictions:

Convictions for 33 offences.  Six offences against property, thirteen theft offences and various other offences, mainly motoring.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:

7 years' imprisonment: (starting point 11 years, increased to 12 to reflect offences taken into consideration).

 

£1,690.33 confiscation order.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

 

 

 

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

Advocate J. Bell for the Defendant.

 

 

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

 

THE BAILIFF:

1.        This defendant has pleaded guilty to the importation of some 3,000 tablets of ecstasy with a street value of approximately £30,000.  He claimed to have purchased them for a fraction of that sum.

2.        It was not the first time that Ryan had imported ecstasy and the Court is asked to take into consideration two further offences when imposing sentence.

3.        Ryan is 33, and has a record of previous convictions although nothing in relation to drug offences.  He does, however, admit that he has abused drugs including alcohol for a number of years.  He has damaged his liver but regrettably seems to have little insight into the consequences of his substance misuse.

4.        It is clear that he has been supplementing his statutory benefits by dealing in drugs and has had little gainful employment in the last two years.

5.        In mitigation he was extremely open with the customs officers, except that he was unwilling to identify his supplier, and he has pleaded guilty to the charge at the first available opportunity.

6.        The Crown Advocate would have taken a starting point of 11 years but has increased that starting point to 12 years to take account of the two offences which the Court is being asked to take into consideration involving the importation of a further 3,000 tablets of ecstasy.  We think that is the proper approach and we adopt it.

7.        We have given anxious and prolonged consideration to the proper allowance to be made for the mitigating factors.  Some members of the Court would have been minded to increase the conclusions on the basis that too great an allowance was being made for the guilty plea and such other minor mitigation as there is.

8.        We do not accept that, in the context of offences being taken into consideration, it is proper to make a further additional allowance on the basis that the accused has written his own indictment.  An allowance has been made by applying a discount to the starting point and we think that that is sufficient in the circumstances of this case.

9.        By a majority the Court has reached the conclusion that the allowance made by the Crown for all the available mitigation is the correct one.  We take into consideration, as requested by the defendant, two further offences of importation of ecstasy pursuant to the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Taking of Offences into Consideration) (Jersey) Rules, 2000.

10.      On the single count on the indictment you are sentenced to 7 years' imprisonment and we order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

Whelan: Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey (2^nd Ed'n): paras 274-276.

Wood -v- A.G. (15^th February, 1994) Jersey Unreported; [1994/32].

A.G. -v- Doyle (8^th March 1995) Jersey Unreported; [1995/46].

A.G. -v- Bouhaire [2004]JRC004.

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