Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2005]JRC113

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

16^th August 2005

The Attorney General

-v-

Adam Frank Neil Curtis

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, following guilty plea:

Age:     31.

Plea:    Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Defendant was reported dealing ecstasy by a member of the public who saw him in a telephone box at Snow Hill and made an anonymous telephone call to the police.  Defendant was stopped outside the Royal Yacht Hotel and searched.  He was found to have £720 in cash in his back pocket and 71 ecstasy tablets in a plastic bag in his sock.  He made "no comment" responses at police interview but entered early guilty plea.

Details of Mitigation:

Defendant had been heroin addict for ten years.  Had been 'clean' for two years until December 2004.  Starting abusing heroin again and got into debt.  Began buying drugs 'on tick' and dealer told him to sell ecstasy to pay for his debt.  Had stayed clean in HMP and claimed he was determined to beat his addiction.

Previous Convictions:

Five previous convictions for nine offences, two of which related to possession of cannabis.  Theft and kindred offences were committed to sell stolen goods to buy drugs.

Conclusions:

Starting point 7½ years, sentence 4½ years' imprisonment.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

7 years' starting point:  4 years' imprisonment: forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.  Confiscation order £720.00.

Mrs S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. Grace for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE BAILIFF:

1.        This is a young man of 31 who has been a drug abuser for 15 years and has been addicted to heroin for more than 10 years.  He claims that he had cured himself of the habit, but relapsed in December 2004.  He built up a debt of about £1,000 and claims that he succumbed to threats from his dealer and agreed to sell ecstasy on the streets in order to satisfy outstanding debts.

2.        At the time of his arrest he was found in possession of 71 tablets of ecstasy with a street value of just over £700 and cash of £720.  He has a number of previous convictions including two for drugs offences.  Applying the test as to the degree to which the defendant was involved in drug trafficking the answer must be that he was involved to a moderate extent.  He was a dealer at the street level.  The guideline case of Bonnar and Noon -v- A.G. (2001 JLR 626) gives a starting point of between 7 and 9 years' imprisonment for trafficking of up to 500 tablets of a Class A drug.

3.        We think that the appropriate starting point in this case is one of 7 years' imprisonment.  In mitigation Curtis is still a relatively young man and has pleaded guilty to the indictment.  He has expressed a determination to overcome his addiction and the tests in the prison have all been negative.  He had asked for help from the Alcohol and Drugs Service shortly before his arrest but had been told that he must return at a later stage.

4.        Curtis, you knew that in selling drugs on the street you were committing a serious offence and risking a sentence of imprisonment.  We have given full weight to all the mitigating circumstances outlined by your counsel and in the reports, and the sentence of the Court is that you will go to prison for 4 years.  We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

Bonnar and Noon -v- A.G. (2001 JLR 626).