Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2006]JRC107

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

26^th July 2006

The Attorney General

-v-

Nelio Martins Dos Santos de Jesus

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, on guilty pleas to:

Age:  21.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

De Jesus was stopped whilst coming through Customs, having arrived from St Malo.  He was found to be carrying 224.6 grams of heroin, 22% pure diamorphine, and 73.06 grams of cannabis resin secreted within a rear speaker unit of his car.  De Jesus said the cannabis was for his personal use and this was accepted by the Crown.  The heroin had a street value in Jersey of about £224,000.  De Jesus on his own admission was not a simple courier but purchased the heroin to sell on the streets of Jersey for substantial personal gain.

Details of Mitigation:

Early guilty plea; frank admissions in interview; youth; previous good character; depression due to family refusing to accept his homosexuality; testimonials shown good network of support of family and friends.

Previous Convictions:

None

Conclusions:

Invitation to recommend deportation.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.  Confiscation Order adjourned until Friday 11 August, 2006.

Deportation not recommended on this occasion.

12 years was correct starting point because he was not merely a courier but a seller.  Aggravating factors applied: the substantial value of the heroin and the potential serious damage to young people.  Mitigating factors applied: youth, no previous convictions, plan was naïve and out of character, low risk of re-offending, powerful mitigation in the reports and the support of his family.

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

Advocate R. C. L. Morley-Kirk for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        De Jesus, you imported 224 grams of heroin into Jersey, with a possible street value of £224,000 or a wholesale value of £44,000.  You bought it in Portugal and you intended to sell it in Jersey for profit. 

2.        The Crown has suggested a starting point of 12 years' imprisonment.  You fall within the 10 - 13 year band in Rimmer Lusk and Bade -v- AG [2001] JRL 373 for 100 -250 grams.  Given the nature of your rôle, namely that you were not simply a courier but you were intending to sell it or arrange its sale, we agree that 12 years is the right starting point.

3.        There is considerable mitigation in your case.  You are only 21 and were 20 at the time of the offences.  You have pleaded guilty and this is of value in the circumstances of this case where the drugs were concealed in a car, where others were present.  You have no previous convictions.  We accept that it was a naïve plan and that you had not planned how you were going to sell the drugs.  You are assessed as being low-risk of re-offending.  There is powerful mitigation set out in the Reports which we have read carefully and we have also read carefully the personal and work references that have been produced.  You clearly have strong support now from your family and we accept that this appears to have been wholly out of character.

4.        Nevertheless this was a very substantial amount of heroin.  It would have been extremely damaging to the young people of this Island if it had been released on to the streets for sale and you were willing to do that in order to make a profit.  We cannot therefore avoid a lengthy sentence notwithstanding the very strong mitigation in this case.

5.        We feel we can make a slight adjustment to the Crown's conclusions to reflect the mitigation and the sentence is as follows.  On Count 1, 6½ years' imprisonment.  On Count 2, 6 months' imprisonment, concurrent.  On Count 3, 6 ½ years' imprisonment, concurrent making a total of 6 ½ years' imprisonment .We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

6.        As to deportation; for most non-British nationals who commit offences of this gravity deportation follows, but we do accept that you have very strong family connections here and that you need their support and are going to need their support in the future, you have very little connection with Madeira and there is powerful mitigation, so in all the circumstances we are not going to recommend deportation; but you must realise that if you re-offend in any way in Jersey with an offence of any seriousness at all then you will have used up your credit and deportation is likely to follow.

Authorities

Rimmer, Lusk and Bade -v- AG [2001] JLR 373.