Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2007]JRC038

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

15^th February 2007

The Attorney General

-v-

Mathew Richard Bendell

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

Age:  26.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

At 3:30am on 17^th September 2006 Bendell criminally broke and entered 22, St Clements Gardens, with intent to commit a crime while the occupants and their 17 month old son were asleep in bed.  He was interrupted and fled the scene.  He could not be identified by the occupants at the time.

Bendell was arrested several days later in connection with other offences.  During interview Bendell admitted breaking and entering into 22, St Clements Gardens.

He was also questioned as to his income, as friends had stated he always carried large amounts of cash.  He confessed that for the previous month, between 8^th August and 17^th September 2006 he had sold 90 ecstasy tablets to persons unknown for profit.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea.  Low intelligence.  Risk of institutionalisation.

Previous Convictions:

69 previous convictions for theft related offences.  1 drugs offence.  Miscellaneous other convictions.

Conclusions:

Bendell is a recidivist offender.

Dwelling house burglaries are the most serious of theft offences; homeowners are entitled to safe enjoyment of their home.  Bendell deprived them of this.

The drugs offence was separate and distinct, therefore requires a consecutive sentence.

Breach of Probation:  6 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 6 years' imprisonment.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Court agreed that Bendell was a recidivist, and that dwelling house burglaries are always considered as serious offences.

Noted that without Bendell's confession, the drugs offence would not have come to light; he would be allowed some mitigation for this.

Breach of Probation:  6 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total 5 years' imprisonment.

S. M. Baker, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate M. H. D. Taylor for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        You are charged with two counts, one of breaking and entering with intent to commit a crime and the second to supplying 90 ecstasy tablets.  The Deputy Bailiff when sentencing Bendell and Ors [2003] JRC 195, for the offence of breaking and entering on the 31^st October, 2003 said that you, Bendell, were the instigator of the two offences.  He said at that time that:

"To commit a burglary of residential property at night is always regarded as particularly serious because of the fear it may cause to occupiers who are woken from their sleep to find a stranger in their house." 

At that time you received a period of imprisonment.  It does not appear to have done you any good at all, because you are also in breach a probation order for receiving stolen goods.

2.        The Crown Advocate has, in our view, rightly referred to you as a 'recidivist' burglar.  It is a tragedy that you have spent a large proportion of the last decade in prison.  Of course, it is right to say that nothing of value was taken and no damage was done to the property.  It is perhaps fortunate that you were heard by the occupier in the early stages of your entry. 

3.        You pleaded guilty, but it is quite clear to us that you need an income and that income, as you see it, can only be gained from crime.  On the second indictment, you in fact wrote the indictment yourself, because you admitted to selling the ecstasy but, of course, you will not name your source.

4.        We have had careful regard to the case of AG -v- Da Silva 1997/218, and for the breaking and entering, and the starting point set out in Bonnar and Noon -v- AG [2001] JLR 626.  Of course there is mitigation in the guilty plea, but there is also a strong mitigation in the confession statement.  We have been greatly assisted by Crown Advocate Baker, but the mitigation of writing your own indictment must count for a little more than has been given, because without that admission, the police would never have discovered the matter.

5.        We are going to sentence you on Count 1 to 3 years' imprisonment.  On Count 2 to 2 years' imprisonment and that is consecutive, and for the breach of probation 6 months' imprisonment and that is concurrent.

Authorities

AG -v- Bendell and Ors [2003] JRC 195.

AG -v- Da Silva 1997/218.

Bonnar and Noon -v- AG [2001] JLR 626.