[2010]JRC223
ROYAL COURT
(Samedi Division)
10th December 2010
Before : |
Sir Philip Bailhache, Kt., Commissioner and Jurats Tibbo and Liddiard |
The Attorney General
-v-
David Lindsay Markland Clegg
Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following guilty pleas to the following charges:
2 counts of: |
Being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law 1999 (Counts 1 and 2). |
Age: 46.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
The defendant was stopped at the harbour in his vehicle and was found to have 2.63 grams of cocaine hidden in his shoe. Street value of £200 in Jersey (Count 1). Two gift wrapped packages contained 1.493 kilos of cannabis resin. Purchase price in India (being likely place of exportation) £540. Wholesale value in Jersey of £7,500 to £9,000. Street value of between £15,000 and £22,500 (Count 2).
Defendant went "no comment" in interview but offered explanation to the authors of the background reports to the effect that undertook importation of cannabis to clear a £3,000 drug debt and to gain an ounce of cocaine at 40% strength. The Crown questioned the veracity of this version given the surrounding evidence.
The Crown took a "starting point" of 7 years for the cocaine and 2 years for the cannabis resin.
Details of Mitigation:
The Crown
Principal piece of mitigation being guilty pleas entered during the Magistrate's Court proceedings. Additional mitigation in relation to the cocaine as this was for personal use only. Mature individual; not of previous good character albeit the last conviction is some sixteen years ago.
The Defence
No issue taking with the "starting points" for either count. This was a case of a commercial importation of cannabis in which the defendant also has a personal quantity of cocaine. The sentence for the cocaine should, therefore, not exceed that for the cannabis importation. Sentences lower than 18 months for both offences was appropriate. Guilty plea; co-operative; references; positive intentions for the future.
Previous Convictions:
Seven convictions for a total of twenty offences including burglary and theft, shoplifting, obtaining property by deception, possession of a controlled drug x 3, theft of a motor vehicle, assault causing actual bodily harm, obstruction of the police.
Conclusions:
Determinations under Drug Trafficking Offences (Jersey) Law 1988, postponed for 16 months from date of conviction.
Count 1: |
2 years' imprisonment. |
Count 2: |
18 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 2 years' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
Defendant to be sentenced for being knowingly concerned in the importation of cocaine and cannabis resin. Cocaine was small quantity for his personal use. The cannabis was 1.5 kilograms with a street value of between £15,000 to £22,000. Defendant's explanation for becoming involved in this enterprise was so as to clear a debt of £3,000. The Court takes his explanation with a pinch of salt given the evidence that this quantity of cannabis was directly sourced from India which came wrapped in Hindustan Times newspaper and the defendant being in India at the relevant time. Counsel are in agreement that the correct "starting point" for the cannabis is 2 years imprisonment and that the somewhat artificial "starting point" for the cocaine is correct at 7 years imprisonment. The Court accepted the submission of Defence counsel and noted that the sentence for the importation of the cocaine should not exceed the sentence for the importation of cannabis. The gravamen of this offence was the importation of cannabis for commercial gain. The Court read the defendant's letter and was glad to note that at last he was addressing some of his problems. He had let down his son and would continue to do so if he did not address his use of drugs. Hopefully he will make use of his time whilst in custody and thereafter he can build a better life for himself. As a matter of principle the Court had applied the appropriate reduction for the guilty plea. The Court minded to vary slightly the Crown's conclusions.
Count 1: |
15 months' imprisonment. |
Count 2: |
15 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 15 months' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.
J. C. Gollop, Esq., Crown Advocate.
Advocate M. L. Preston for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE commissioner:
1. This defendant is to be sentenced for being knowingly concerned with the importation of cocaine and cannabis resin. The cocaine was a small quantity for personal use; the cannabis resin weighed 1.5 kilograms with a street value in Jersey of between £15,000 and £22,000. The defendant had agreed to deliver the drugs to an unnamed individual and a drug debt of £3,000 was to be forgiven. That was the explanation offered by the defendant although it might be taken with a pinch of salt given that he had recently returned from India and the cannabis was wrapped in the Hindustan Times. Be all that as it may, both Counsel have agreed that the appropriate starting point for the importation of the cannabis resin is 2 years' imprisonment and a rather artificial 7 years starting point for the importation of a small quantity of cocaine has been agreed on the basis of authority.
2. We accept the submission of Defence counsel that the sentence for the importation of cocaine should not exceed the sentence for the importation of cannabis given that the gravamen of this offence is the importation of cannabis for commercial purposes.
3. Clegg, we have read your letter and we are glad to note that you are at last trying to address the problems of your life and in particular the addiction to cocaine which has probably blighted it for many years. You have let down your son and you will continue to let down your son if you do not abandon the use of illegal drugs. We hope that you will make use of your time in prison to obtain qualifications and to improve yourself and that when you come out you will lead a law-abiding life. We have listened to the submissions of your counsel and we agree that as a matter of principle we should apply a conventional discount for the guilty plea and for the other mitigating factors. We are therefore going to vary the conclusions slightly.
4. On Count 1 you will be sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment, on Count 2; 15 months' imprisonment, concurrent, which makes a total of 15 months' imprisonment.
5. We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.
Authorities
AG-v-McKibbin and Others [2009] JRC 005
AG-v-Forrester, Sumner and Ulmon 2001/67.