Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2005]JRC118

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

19^th August 2005

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Paul Anthony Hughes

 

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charges:

 

1 count of:	Breaking and entry and larceny.  (Count 1).
1 count of:	Possession of a controlled drug contrary to Article 8 (1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978.  (Count 2).

 

 

Age:     30.

 

Plea:    Guilty.

 

Details of Offence:

Defendant and the victim of burglary both lived on the St. Peter's Country Apartments complex at the material time.  The Defendant attended a party at the complex and became highly intoxicated on a mixture of drinks and drugs.  He entered the victim's home at night, when the family was asleep, and stole goods belonging to the victim, his wife and young daughter.  Items stolen were three mobile telephones, two telephone chargers, a States of Jersey police warrant card, several bank and store cards, a handbag together with purse and contents, a child's pair of spectacles and £120 in cash.  Victim did not realise he had been burgled until 7 o'clock the following morning.  Police were called and by 07.45 police had located the Defendant, asleep at his flat.  Most of the stolen goods were recovered from Defendant's bedroom, save for the handbag and its contents.  Stolen store and credit cards, together with cash was found in Defendant's wallet.  Gel lifts of footprints within the victim's home matched the Defendant's training shoes which he was wearing on the night in question.  When interviewed Defendant gave unsatisfactory explanation although he later pleaded guilty.  Claimed that he was so intoxicated he could not remember what had happened.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Not planned or premeditated - opportunistic.  Most of the goods recovered save for the handbag and contents.  Remorse; guilty plea; pregnant girlfriend; efforts to beat drug addiction; offer of employment.  Prosecution could not prove beyond all reasonable doubt that £120 cash found in Defendant's wallet belonged to victim because forensic evidence negative.  Defendant voluntarily handed the cash back to the victim.

 

Previous Convictions:

Two previous offences of burglary in 1997 in the UK, for which Defendant was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	3 years' imprisonment.
Count 2:	2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

 

Count 1:	2 years' imprisonment.
Count 2:	2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent.

 

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

 

 

Mrs S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate.

Advocate S. Franckel for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

 

THE BAILIFF:

1.        This defendant has pleaded guilty to breaking and entering a private dwelling house during the night, and to stealing a number of items of property and to possession of a small quantity of cannabis.  He was under the influence of drugs and alcohol when the offence of burglary took place.  He has a previous conviction for burglary in 1997 when he was sentenced to 12 months' imprisonment.

2.        Counsel for the defendant has urged upon us the submission that a non-custodial sentence should be imposed, supported by the report of the Probation Officer, principally because the defendant acted whilst he was in such a state of intoxication that he apparently did not know what he was doing.

3.        We cannot accept that submission.  Violating the privacy of the home of a member of the public by night is a very serious offence, not just because of the loss of property and personal possessions, but also because of the sense of invasion and insecurity which almost invariably follows such offences and did follow so far as this particular household is concerned. 

4.        In mitigation the defendant has pleaded guilty to the indictment, has expressed some remorse and has been making efforts to seek help from the Drug and Alcohol Service.  He is entitled to credit for that.  We accept that this was an opportunistic offence in that there was no premeditation.  Most of the property has been recovered and the defendant has repaid cash which was stolen.  Taking all those factors into account and giving as much weight as we can to the mitigation available the sentence of the Court is that you will go to prison for 2 years on Count 1, and 2 weeks, concurrent on Count 2, making a total of 2 years' imprisonment.

Authorities

A.G. -v- Da Silva (1997)JRC218.

Whelan: Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey (2^nd Ed'n): para 372.

R -v- Perks [2002] All ER (D) 763.

A.G. -v- Miller, Corvel, Louis, Manning (1999) JRC186.