Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2006]JRC137

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

29^th September 2006

The Attorney General

-v-

Maciej Adam Filipczak

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

Age:  28.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Defendant was arrested at 0220 for urinating in Cattle Street.  He appeared to be drunk and was taken to the Police Station.  When searched, three pieces of paper were found on him appearing to be drug dealing lists.  A small piece of cannabis was found in his possession.  A search of his home address revealed 175 amphetamine tablets and 7.9 grams of amphetamine powder.  At his later interview he also admitted to supply a total of 126 amphetamine tablets and 22 grams of amphetamine powder during a five-week period and supplying approximately ¼ oz. of herbal cannabis.  Total street value of approximately £3,640.  Defendant later accepted that he had been supplying the drugs on a commercial basis.

Details of Mitigation:

Early guilty plea, previous good character, co-operative with police.  Difficult family background in Poland.  Already served 9 months 10 days on remand in custody.

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

Total: 18 months' imprisonment.

Recommendation for deportation sought.

Seeking £223 towards prosecution costs.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Total 15 months' imprisonment.

No order as to Costs.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs is ordered

S. Sharpe, Crown Advocate.

Advocate S. E. Fitz for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You were found in possession of 175 amphetamine tablets and 7.9 grams of amphetamine power, and you also admitted having supplied previously 126 tablets and 22 grams of powder over a 5 week period.  The street price of these drugs was approximately £3,600.

2.        We have listened carefully to what your advocate has said in mitigation.  She has emphasised that you pleaded guilty immediately, that you were fully co-operative, that you have no previous convictions and she also referred to the other matters in the Probation Report.

3.        The Crown has suggested a starting point of 2 years' imprisonment, and we agree with your advocate that a reduction down to 18 months' imprisonment, which is only 25%, is not sufficient to reflect the mitigation which she has described.  We specifically make no criticism of Mrs Sharpe in this respect as she did not prepare the conclusions.

4.        We think that the correct sentence is, in total, one of 15 months' imprisonment.  That will be the sentence on Counts 1 and 5, 4 months on Count 23, and 12 months on all the other counts, all of them concurrent.  In other words 15 months' imprisonment in total.

5.        We then turn to deportation.  Your advocate has urged that we should not make a recommendation on the grounds that, for the reasons she gave, we should not find that your continued presence in the Island would be detrimental.  We cannot accede to that.  If foreign nationals come to Jersey and start supplying drugs, whether Class A or Class B, we consider that to be highly detrimental to the young people of our community.  Furthermore, in your case it continued over 5 weeks and you are assessed at medium risk of re-offending.  We have no hesitation in saying that your continued presence in the Island would be detrimental and we wish it to be clearly understood by foreign nationals who come to the Island that if, they deal in drugs, they are at high risk of being deported.  In your case there are no family considerations which point against deportation and therefore we make the recommendation.  We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and no order as to costs.

No Authorities