Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2008]JRC167

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

26^th September 2008

The Attorney General

-v-

Jemma Frances Daniel

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

Age:  26.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

On Thursday 22^nd May, 2008, Police Officers attended South Hill car park in St. Helier, where they observed Daniel and a friend sitting inside a parked vehicle smoking what was later confirmed to be cannabis and in possession of a tobacco pouch which contained what was subsequently confirmed to comprise 2.52 grams of cannabis resin.  Daniel was arrested. 

Later the same day, Police Officers executed a search warrant at Daniel's home address and found located in Daniel's bedroom were:-

a)     Five large pieces of suspected cannabis resin subsequently confirmed to consist of 208.50 grams of cannabis resin;

b)     A tobacco pouch containing some small lumps subsequently confirmed to comprise 2.13 grams of cannabis resin;

c)     £90 in cash.

In interview under caution Daniel admitted that:-

a)     The cigarette resin and lump of resin found in the vehicle at South Hill car park contained cannabis (Count 1);

b)     the contents of the tobacco pouch (Count 3) and five large pieces of resin found in her bedroom comprised cannabis (Count 2) and belonged solely to her;

c)     she intended to supply some of the five lumps of cannabis to friends (Count 2);

d)     she had sold cannabis resin to her friend Glynn in the previous week (Count 4);

e)     she had also supplied cannabis resin to two unnamed friends on a no profit basis in 2008 (Count 5);

f)      the £90 cash found in her bedroom was money left over from the sale of one ounce of cannabis to Glynn, for which she received £160.

Details of Mitigation:

Exemplary references.  Good work record.  Assessed as low risk of re-offending.  Had resigned from employment with the States of Jersey but her employer had indicated, depending on the outcome of the case, would consider re-employing the Defendant.

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

Total:  210 hours' Community Service Order or 15 months' imprisonment in default.

Confiscation order in the sum of £160 sought (£90 already seized during the search and the Court was asked to order the balance of £70 to be paid of 3 days' imprisonment).

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Confiscation Order of £160 cash or 1 weeks' imprisonment in default.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.

Social supply to friends, at cost and for no profit is serious and will ordinarily lead to an immediate sentence of imprisonment.  However there was powerful mitigation: exemplary references and a first class work record.  Guilty pleas entered from the outset and she effectively wrote her own Indictment in relation to Counts concerning possession with intent to supply and supply. Exceptionally, a non-custodial sentence would be imposed but only as a direct alternative to imprisonment. 

B. H. Lacey, Crown Advocate.

Advocate E. Jordan for the defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        This was a case of social supply of cannabis to friends and you were not making any profit.  But even such supply is a serious offence and more often than not leads to a sentence of imprisonment, but your Advocate Miss Jordan has very succinctly put forward the very powerful mitigation in your case. 

2.        You have an exemplary record, you have never been before the Courts before, you have a first class work record and we have seen the references.  You pleaded guilty from the outset and have been co-operative, you are clearly extremely remorseful not only for the effect it has had on you but also the effect on your family and the Probation report assesses you as being at low risk of re-offending and strongly recommends a non-custodial sentence. 

3.        In all the circumstances we can agree the conclusions of the Crown.  So, in the circumstances, we are going to impose a sentence of Community Service because you must be punished for this offence.  We are going to vary the conclusions slightly because we take the view that Counts 2, 4 and 5 all form part of your supplying activities and there ought to be a concurrent sentence of similar length on each one. 

4.        The sentence of the Court is as follows: on Count 1; 20 hours' community service, Count 2; 210 hours, Count 3; 20 hours, Count 4; 210 hours, Count 5; 210 hours, all of those to be concurrent.  That is 210 hours in all and we say that the equivalent sentence which we would have imposed would have been the 15 months' imprisonment suggested by the Crown. 

5.        We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

6.        We also make a confiscation order of £160 or 1 week's imprisonment in default.  You will have 7 days to pay this sum. 

Authorities

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