Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2008]JRC156

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

19^th September 2008

Before     :

J. A. Clyde-Smith, Esq., Commissioner and Jurats Bullen and Morgan..

The Attorney General

-v-

John Le Voguer

John Steven Allardice

Liam Stephen Nicholson

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused were remanded by the Inferior Number, on the following charges:

John Le Voguer

1 count of:	Being concerned in the supplying of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(c) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey Law) 1978.  (Count 1).
1 count of:	Supplying a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(b) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey Law) 1978.  (Count 2).
3 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey Law) 1978.  (Counts 3, 6 and 7).

Age:  23.

Plea: Guilty (Counts 1-3).  Not Guilty (Counts 6 and 7).

Details of Offence:

On 27^th March, 2008, the house occupied by Le Voguer, Allardice and Nicholson was searched under warrant.  Small personal amounts of Class A and Class B drugs were recovered, together with paraphernalia.  Also recovered were quantities of cash.

From the Lounge

1.53g cannabis resin - notional street value £8.50 (Count 6).

468mg cannabis - notional street value £2.62 (Count 7).

From Le Voguer's bedroom

2 tablets comprising 80 and 82mg MDMA - street value £10 each (Count 3).

Small bag of white powder comprising Benzylpiperazine (not controlled).

From the bedroom occupies by Allardice

Single tablet comprising 78mg MDMA - street value £10 (Count 5).

From the bedroom occupied by Nicholson

Single tablet comprising 72mg MDMA - street value £10 (Count 8).

8.65g cannabis resin - notional street value £48.44 (Count 9).

35 mg cannabis resin - notional street value 19p (Count 9).

448mg cannabis - notional street value £2.50 (Count 10).

£2,100 in a biscuit tub.

£80 in a bedside drawer.

In addition, £200 was seized from the front pocket of Allardice's trousers.

During interview Le Voguer and Allardice made admissions as to previous drug dealing.

Le Voguer admitted facilitating the supply by a Polish man in Platinum of between 20 and 30 tablets of MDMA (street value between £200 and £300) (Count 1).  For this his drinks were bought and he was paid £150.  Had he not been arrested he admitted intending to do the same thing the following week.

Le Voguer also admitted the supply of between 4 and 5oz of cannabis resin (street value between £640 and £800) on approximately 12 occasions during the month prior to his arrest (Count 2).  Allardice had on one occasion referred a friend to him.  That person had then been supplied with cannabis by Le Voguer (Count 4).

In addition, Le Voguer admitted obtaining the white powder thinking it was amphetamine and intending to use it as such. 

Le Voguer, Allardice and Nicholson made frank admissions as to the small personal amounts of drugs recovered from the house.  Allardice admitted owing a drug debt of £1,000 for cannabis he had obtained for personal use over a seven month period. 

All accused were questioned extensively as to the cash recovered from the premises.  All gave conflicting versions as to its origin and it was subsequently returned by the police. 

Details of Mitigation:

Residual youth, guilty pleas, previous good character and remorse.  Wrote his Indictment insofar as Counts 1 and 2 were concerned.

Previous Convictions:

Dealt with at Parish Hall level for offences being drunk and disorderly and malicious damage but otherwise of previous good character.

Conclusions:

Count 1:	1 year's imprisonment.
Count 2:	9 months' imprisonment, consecutive.
Count 3:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 1 year 9 months' imprisonment.

Confiscation order in the nominal sum of £1 sought.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs and paraphernalia sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:	180 hours' Community Service Order, 1 year's imprisonment in default.
Count 2:	150 hours' Community Service Order, 9 months' imprisonment in default, concurrent.
Count 3:	40 hours' Community Service Order, 7 days' imprisonment in default, concurrent.

Total: 180 hours' Community Service Order, 1 year's imprisonment in default.

Confiscation order in the nominal sum of £1 ordered.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs and paraphernalia ordered.

All three accused were not viewed by the Court as sophisticated and their involvement in illegal drugs was limited.  In the circumstances the Court felt able to avoid a custodial sentence.  The Court would respond to defendants who themselves respond and are honest.

John Steven Allardice

1 count of:	Being concerned in the supplying of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(c) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey Law) 1978.  (Count 4).
3 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey Law) 1978.  (Counts 5, 6 and 7).

Age:  27.

Plea: Guilty (Counts 4 and 5).  Not Guilty (Counts 6 and 7).

Details of Offence:

See Le Voguer above.

Details of Mitigation:

Residual youth, guilty pleas and remorse.

Previous Convictions:

Previous convictions for possessing a controlled drug, with intent to supply (20 to 30 MDMA tablets), possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply (100 amphetamine tablets) and supply of between 8 and 12 ecstasy tablets.

Conclusions:

Count 4:	3 months' imprisonment.
Count 5:	1 month's imprisonment, consecutive.

Breach of Community Service Order, 2 months' imprisonment, consecutive.

Total: 6 months' imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs and paraphernalia sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 4:	50 hours' Community Service Order, 1 month's imprisonment in default.
Count 5:	40 hours' Community Service Order, 7 days' imprisonment in default, concurrent.

Breach of Community Service Order, 40 hours' Community Service Order, 7 days' imprisonment in default, consecutive.

Total: 90 hours' Community Service Order, 1 month and 7 days' imprisonment in default.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs and paraphernalia ordered.

Allardice had previously competed 340 hours' Community Service.  The instant offending had, however, taken place at a time when the Community Service Order remained in place.  The Probation Service suggested this was a technical breach.  The Crown disagreed.

See Le Voguer above.

Liam Stephen Nicholson

3 counts of:

Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey Law) 1978.  (Counts 8, 9 and 10).

Age:  26.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Le Voguer above.

Details of Mitigation:

Residual youth, guilty pleas and previous good character.

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

Count 8:	1 month's' imprisonment.
Count 9:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 10:	2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 1 month's imprisonment.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs and paraphernalia sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 8:	£250 fine or 2 weeks' imprisonment in default.
Count 9:	£250 fine, concurrent.
Count 10:	£250 fine, concurrent.

Total: £250 fine or 2 weeks' imprisonment in default.

Fine payable £25 per week.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs and paraphernalia ordered.

See Le Voguer above.

A. J. Belhomme. Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate S. A. Pearmain for Le Voguer.

Advocate R. J. MacRae for Allardice.

Advocate C. J. Scholfield for Nicholson.

JUDGMENT

commissioner:

1.        These defendants lived together in a flat leased by Le Voguer and have pleaded guilty to a number of drugs-related offences.  On the 27^th March, 2008 their flat was searched and small quantities of cannabis resin, cannabis and ecstasy tablets were found as well as a set of electronic scales.  The value of the drugs found was small.  However in the course of interviews, the defendants Le Voguer and Allardice admitted and in consequence wrote their own indictments for the more serious charges they have pleaded guilty to; namely, in the case of Le Voguer, being concerned in supplying 20 ecstasy tablets in Platinum Nightclub with a street value of between £200 - £300 and supplying 4 ounces of cannabis resin with a street value of between £640 - £800 over a 1 month period to friends, and in the case of Allardice being concerned in the supplying of cannabis resin.  In the Crown's view, however, Allardice's role was minimal in that he was instrumental in introducing only one person to Le Voguer for the supply of cannabis resin.  The guideline cases do not apply to an offence of being concerned in the supply of drugs because so much turns on whether the involvement of the defendant matches or exceeds the supplier or is peripheral to it. 

2.        In the case of Le Voguer the Crown seek a starting point of 3 years' imprisonment for his being concerned in the supply of ecstasy, and 9 months, consecutive, for his being concerned in the supply of cannabis resin.

3.        For Allardice the Crown moves for a sentence of 3 months for his being concerned in the supply of cannabis resin and 1 month consecutive for his possession of 1 ecstasy tablet.

4.        Nicholson has pleaded guilty to charges of possession of 1 ecstasy tablet for which the Crown seeks a sentence of 1 month's imprisonment and shorter concurrent sentences for possession of cannabis and cannabis resin, because of the totality principal and because Nicholson might properly have been dealt with before the Magistrate's Court.

5.        There is a further factor in relation to Allardice.  On 15^th February, 2007, he pleaded guilty to 2 counts of possessing ecstasy and amphetamine tablets with the intention to supply and was sentenced to 240 hours' community service.  On 4^th January, 2008, he was sentenced to a further 100 hours' for failing to conform to the conditions of his community service order to be completed by the 15^th February, 2009.  He in fact completed this by the 22^nd July, 2008, and so has undertaken 340 hours' community service in total.  Even so the current offences were committed during the time of his community service order and therefore constitutes a breach, which the probation service described as technical.  The Crown do not accept that and seek a 2 month consecutive sentence for this breach.

6.        We are able to say in relation to all three defendants, having giving careful consideration to the submissions put before us, that we do not regard any of you as being sophisticated offenders and we find your involvement in the drugs trade to be very limited.  Therefore, for all three of you we feel able to avoid custodial sentences.  The Court will respond to defendants who do make an effort to respond and to turn their lives around and indeed who have been honest, and that applies to all three of you.  On the facts of this case we regard the activities, in terms of the drugs offences of Le Voguer and Allardice, such as to warrant concurrent sentences other than the case of the breach of community service. 

7.        Mr Le Voguer you are aged 23 and you must therefore have credit for your youth.  You have good character.  You pleaded guilty and you have expressed remorse.  You have been assessed at being at a low risk of re-offending and you have not tried to minimise your involvement in these offences in any way.  As previously mentioned, you wrote your own indictment in respect of both of the supply charges.  You are in gainful employment and you have produced some excellent references.  You have the support of your family.  We are therefore going to sentence you to a total of 180 hours' community service.

8.        Allardice you are 27 and therefore also entitled to residual credit for your youth.  You pleaded guilty and we accept that you should get full credit for that plea.  You too have expressed remorse.  You have been assessed at being at a low risk of re-offending and the Crown accept that your involvement in this was minimal.  We accept that you are in breach of the community service order but we note that you have completed 340 hours' well in advance of the time period allowed to you.  You have also got very good references.  You are in the middle of your apprenticeship as an electrician and you are expecting your first child in December.  We are going to sentence you therefore to a total of 90 hours' community service.

9.        Mr Nicholson, you are 26.  You get some credit for your residual youth.  You have pleaded guilty.  You have good character.  You have been remorseful and indeed the probation office say you have been embarrassed and upset at having committed these offences.  You too have produced good references.  You are employed in the building industry and we note you have completed your apprenticeship and are attending an advanced carpentry course at Highlands.  We accept that your case could have been dealt with before the Magistrate's Court, that as a result of the five or so attendances that you have had here you have incurred costs that you would not otherwise have had to incur, and you have also had to suffer delay of some six months.  We are going to deal with your offences by way of a fine. 

10.      Mr Le Voguer you are sentenced as follows, on count 1 to 180 hours' community service which is the equivalent of 1 year's imprisonment, count 2; 150 hours' community service which is equivalent to 9 months' concurrent, count 3; 40 hours' community service which is equivalent to 7 days' imprisonment, concurrent which makes a total of 180 hours' community service which is the equivalent of 1 year's imprisonment.

11.      Mr Allardice on count 4 you are sentenced to 50 hours' community service which is equivalent to 1 month's imprisonment, count 5; 40 hours' community service which is equivalent to 7 days' imprisonment, concurrent.  For the breach of the community service order you are sentenced to 40 hours' community service which is the equivalent of 7 days' imprisonment, consecutive.  This gives rise to a total of 90 hours' community service which is the equivalent of 1 month and 7 days' imprisonment.

12.      Nicholson on counts 8, 9 and 10 you are fined £250 or 2 weeks imprisonment in default each being concurrent to the other which is a total fine of £250 and we allow you to pay that at the rate of £25 a week.

13.      We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and other paraphernalia.

Authorities

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

AG -v- Antunes, Saraiva and Viveiros [2003] JLR 144.

AG -v- Hansen [2007] JRC 055.

McDonough -v- AG [1994] JLR N7a.

Campbell, Molloy and Mackenzie -v- AG [1995] JLR 136.

AG -v- Thomas 8 March, 1996 Jersey Unreported.

AG -v- Knights et al [2007] JRC 234.

AG -v- Marsh [2008] JRC 121.

AG -v- Allardice [2007] JRC 039.

AG -v- Allardice [2008] JRC 001.