[2009]JRC153
ROYAL COURT
(Samedi Division)
4th August 2009
Before : |
Sir Philip Bailhache, Kt., Commissioner and Jurats Tibbo, Le Breton, King, Morgan and Liddiard. |
The Attorney General
-v-
Carlos Andre Romao Teixeira
Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 5th June, 2009, following guilty pleas to the following charges:
1 count of: |
Possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply, contrary to Article 8(2) 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 3). |
1 count of: |
Attempted possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 5). |
1 count of: |
Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 6). |
Age: 31.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
In March 2009, Police executed a warranted at Teixeira's flat. During a search they seized cocaine weighing a total of 33 grams (some of which had been cut with teething powder and packaged in individual wraps), 26 grams of cannabis resin, and approximately 18 grams of caffeine packaged in individual plastic wraps. Teixeira was arrested and interviewed.
He frankly admitted that all the dugs were his. He said that he had obtained approximately an ounce and a half of cocaine "on tick" and that he had subsequently "cut" half an ounce of this cocaine with the teething powder, thus creating 18 wraps. He admitted selling 4 of these and using 7. The remaining 7 wraps, together with the rest of the cocaine, all form the basis of the first count.
Teixeira maintained that he thought the caffeine was amphetamine, although upon analysis this was proved false. He said that this and the cannabis seized were both for his personal use.
Details of Mitigation:
Guilty pleas, wrote own Indictment to supply offence, good employment record.
Previous Convictions:
Five previous convictions comprising eleven offences, seven of which are drug related offences. These include four charges of simple possession between 1997 and 2007. Also a conviction in 2007 for possession of cannabis with intent to supply, possession of cannabis and cultivation of cannabis. Teixeira was sentenced on 16th March, 2007, to a 2 year Probation order and 150 hours community service. His current offending placed him in breach of the Probation Order.
Conclusions:
Count 1: |
Starting point 9 years. 5 years' imprisonment. |
Count 3: |
3 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Count 5: |
3 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Count 6: |
3 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 5 years' imprisonment.
No additional penalty for breach of probation.
Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
The Court accepted Teixeira's submission that he would have used some of the cocaine seized for himself, and accordingly reduced the starting point to 8 years' imprisonment.
Count 1: |
Starting point 8 years. 4 years' imprisonment. |
Count 3: |
3 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Count 5: |
1 month's imprisonment, concurrent. |
Count 6: |
1 month's imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 4 years' imprisonment.
No additional penalty for breach of Probation.
Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.
C. M. M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.
Advocate M. J. Haines for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE commissioner:
1. This defendant might well have expected to be sent to prison in 2007 when he appeared before this Court charged with offences involving the production and supply of cannabis. He was given a chance and placed on probation with a community service order. Two years later he is to be sentenced for more serious trafficking offences involving the Class A drug, cocaine. The Court has no option but to impose a custodial sentence.
2. The Crown Advocate has taken a starting point of 9 years' imprisonment based on the guideline case of Rimmer, Lusk and Bade-v-AG [2001] JLR 373 and the quantity of cocaine involved, namely 33 grams.
3. We accept the argument of defence counsel that part of that cocaine would have been consumed by the defendant personally and we feel able therefore to take a starting point at the bottom of the relevant band namely one of 8 years' imprisonment.
4. In mitigation the defendant has pleaded guilty to the Indictment; indeed he wrote his own Indictment in relation to the charge of supplying. He has however, as we have indicated, previous convictions for drug offences. We are prepared to make the same allowances for the mitigating factors as were allowed by the Crown Advocate.
5. You have a good family background, you have let down your parents very badly. You were given a chance by this Court two years ago and you have let down the Court by continuing to offend. You have risked your relationship with your partner and you have let down your child and shown yourself to be an irresponsible father. We have however taken account of your letter and we hope that the progress that you have been making in prison will be maintained when you have served your sentence. You have everything to gain from life and we hope that you can put all this drug-taking behind you when you come out of prison.
6. We are going to impose the following sentences; on Count 1 you will be sentenced to 4 years' imprisonment, on Count 3; 3 years' imprisonment, on Count 5; 1 month's imprisonment, on Count 6; 1 month's imprisonment, all those sentences to run concurrently making a total of 4 years' imprisonment.
7. We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.
Authorities