Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2007]JRC082

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

13^th April 2007

The Attorney General

-v-

Damian Ivan Raikes

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

Age:  27.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

The Police were called to a disturbance which involved the Defendant who shouted and swore abuse at Police Officers inciting them to arrest them.  He was duly arrested and pieces of cannabis resin were found on him.  A search of his address revealed the 3.7 ounces of cannabis together with a deal list.  A search of a further address to which he had ties produced a further deal list.  The Defendant maintained that this deal list was historic and referred to 27 ounces of cannabis.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea.

Lack of previous convictions.

He was an exemplary father in difficult family circumstances.

Previous Convictions:

The Defendant had no previous convictions.

Conclusions:

Confiscation order, nominal amount £1.00.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The Court took account of the mitigation available together with the fact that there had been some delay in proceeding with the matter and in particular the unusual and particular circumstances of his family and the role he played in it.  For those reasons they decided that the matter was exceptional and a prison sentence could be avoided.

Confiscation order in nominal amount of £1.00.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

S. E. Fitz, Crown Advocate.

Advocate D. J. Hopwood for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE COMMISSIONER:

1.        This defendant is aged 27 and is to be sentenced for supplying over 27 ounces of cannabis resin between October 2004 and October 2006, conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace, possession of 26 grams of cannabis resin for his personal use and possession of 3 to 7 ounces of cannabis resin with intent to supply.

2.        The defendant was arrested following a commotion at de Quetteville Court where he was heard shouting and swearing from behind a fence.  He jumped over the fence, shouted and swore at police officers and tried to push past them, challenging them to arrest him which they duly did.  (Count 2).

3.        The search of his person produced 26 grams of cannabis resin which is the subject of Count 3.  Search of his home address produced 3 - 7 ounces of cannabis resin and a deal list showing seven individuals owing a total of £750.  It was established that this cannabis was to be sold for £140 per ounce and that accounts for Count 4.

4.        He volunteered to the police before he knew that they actually had in their possession, an earlier dealing list at premises he had occupied previously, and that accounts for count 1 which is in fact the most serious of the counts which he faces.

5.        The defendant admitted that the substance found was cannabis resin and that he had marked the cannabis in order to cut it and supply it to his friends.  They in turn would also supply cannabis to him.  The defendant has pleaded guilty to the charges and he has no previous convictions. 

6.        The defendant informed the Alcohol and Drug Service that he first started using cannabis four years ago, and usually smoked an ounce with friends at weekends.  He admitted to the police being a user for some ten years.  In any event he reports no ill effects from his use of cannabis and regards it, or did regard it, as far less harmful than alcohol and tobacco, notwithstanding his current situation. 

7.        The defendant presented to the Alcohol and Drug Service as mistrustful and emotionally immature for his age and was not considered suitable for a community service treatment order. 

8.        The Crown cited the case of AG -v- Bates and Fairbrace [2007] JRC 006 for a starting point for supplying cannabis of this quantity of 18 months and the defence do not demur from that being the appropriate starting point, and we accept that it is the appropriate starting point.

9.        There is in our view much mitigation in this case; the defendant has pleaded guilty, he has no previous convictions, as I have already mentioned, and was co-operative with the police, in particular in effect writing his own indictment and informing them of the existence of this earlier list.

10.      There have been delays in the prosecution of the case, and in our view there would be a very substantial reduction to take into account all of the mitigation that is available from the 18 months' starting point.

11.      Mr Raikes we have agonised over this case whilst we retired.  You have come so close to being sent to prison, but we have taken into account the mitigation that I have mentioned.   We have also taken into account, what we regard as the unusual and particular circumstances of your family and the role you play in that family.  For all these reasons we are going to spare you prison.

12.      You will be sentenced as follows.  On Count 1, you will do community service of 150 hours, on Count 2, community service of 40 hours, concurrent, on Count 3, 40 hours' community service, concurrent and on count 4, 120 hours' community service again concurrent.  That is a total of 150 hours' community service.

13.      Now the sentences which we would otherwise have imposed upon you, if we had not given you this opportunity would have been 9 months' imprisonment in relation to the first count, 1 week on Count 2, concurrent, 1 week on Count 3, concurrent and 6 months' on Count 4, concurrent.  If there are any issues in terms of your not co-operating in the carrying out of your community service, and if you are brought back to Court as a result of that, you will almost certainly face being sent to prison for 9 months. 

14.      We also order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

AG -v- Bates and Fairbrace [2007] JRC 006.