Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2007]JRC182

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

27^th September 2007

The Attorney General

-v-

Kamal Hussain

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 10th August, 2007, on the following charges:

Age:  28.

Plea: Guilty (Counts 1-3 and 6).  Not guilty pleas were accepted by the Crown in relation to Counts 4 and 5.

Details of Offence:

On the afternoon of 15^th December, 2006, the Defendant walked into the reception of the "Health Plus" Medical Centre on Queen's Road, having just arrived there on his moped.  The receptionist formed the opinion that the Defendant was either on drugs or alcohol and when he drove away the Police were notified.

Approximately 20 minutes later, the Defendant walked into the Police Enquiry desk on an unrelated matter.  The Officer on duty formed the opinion that he was in no condition to drive a motor vehicle, and given the information already received, arrested him.

The Defendant was medically examined which showed that he was unfit to drive through drink or drugs (Count 1).  Enquiries then revealed that he was disqualified from driving and was thus uninsured (Count 2 and 3).

On 18^th April, 2007, Customs Officers attended at the Defendant's address in order to conduct a search authorised by a warrant.  During the search, two wrapped packages were found within a duvet cover, the first containing 231.68 grams of heroin consisting of 61% by weight of diamorphine, the second containing 27.65 grams of heroin consisting of 52% by weight of diamorphine.  A Police expert has estimated that the street value of the drugs was between £64,882 and £129,665.

Officers also seized £1,000 cash, divided into bundles of £100, a set of scales, a white envelope containing £800 cash, divided into bundles of £100 of mixed notes, together with 3 SIM cards.  In a dustbin, burnt tin foil containing traces of heroin was also found, together with a quantity of nappy bag off-cuts.

Later that day the Defendant was arrested as he was about to enter his premises (Count 6).

In both cases, the Defendant gave "no comment" interviews.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, first drug trafficking offence, addict entrenched in a drug culture.

Previous Convictions:

22 previous convictions for 51 offences, 10 of which are drug related.

Conclusions:

Starting point 11 years' imprisonment.

Total: 7 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation Order of £2,642.25 sought.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.

Disqualification from driving on Counts 1, 2 and 3, for 3 years sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Crown's conclusions on drugs offence granted.  Slight reduction on motoring offences.  Court confirmed that the allegations raised by the Defendant that he was threatened into committing the offence were not mitigation.

Starting point 11 years' imprisonment.

Total: 7 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation Order of £2,642.25 made.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.

Disqualification from driving on Counts 1, 2 and 3, for 3 years ordered.

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

Advocate J. M. Grace for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are a heroin addict who has failed, over the years, to respond to treatment, and in particular you were sentenced to 2½ years' imprisonment in relation to possession of drugs and were released only in March 2006.  Yet now here you are before us for an offence related to possession with intent to supply of 259 grams of heroin.

2.        When interviewed at the time you gave no explanation of what you were doing with this heroin plus some money which was found in your flat.  However you now say that you were minding them for someone else and the Court accepts that and sentences you on that basis. 

3.        There is clearly no alternative to prison in this case and the Court agrees that the correct starting point is one of 11 years, having regard to the quantity of drugs and your involvement.

4.        In mitigation you have pleaded guilty, although your initial interview was to give no comment, and therefore you cannot get any additional mitigation for co-operation at that time.  We have read your letter carefully and we note that you say this offence was committed because of threats which were made to you.  However the Court has repeatedly said that those who, by the illegal use of drugs, get themselves into a position where threats are subsequently made cannot plead in mitigation that those threats have caused them to carry out drug dealing activities.  We have read all the reports and we have carefully considered your letter and all that your Advocate has said, but we are satisfied that the Crown has made sufficient deduction from the starting point to reflect the mitigation available.  Indeed in some respects you could be said to be fortunate that the motoring offences are being dealt with concurrently with the drug offences, as they are quite different, but we agree that in the overall circumstances that is the right course.  We are going to make some minor reductions to the motoring offences for the reason put forward by your Advocate.

5.        On Count 1; 4 months' imprisonment, on Count 2; 6 months' imprisonment, on Count 3; 6 months' imprisonment, on Count 6; 7 years' imprisonment, all of those to be concurrent, so that is a total of 7 years.

6.        We disqualify you from driving for 3 years and we order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

No Authorities