Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2011]JRC115

Royal Court

(Samedi)

17 June 2011

Before     :

Sir Philip Bailhache, Kt., Commissioner, and Jurats Tibbo and Olsen.

The Attorney General

-v-

Dean Christopher Rawlinson

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

3 counts of:	Breaking and entry and larceny (Counts 1-3).
2 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Counts 4 and 5).

Age:  20.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Defendant is seen on CCTV system inside Chambers Pub.  He is seen entering the staff accommodation at the rear of the premises.  A resident at the nearby flats called the police due to the suspicious behaviour of the defendant in the courtyard.  When the police arrived he ran away.  He was subsequently seen in Mulcaster Street on CCTV with money falling out of the bottom of his trousers.  He was arrested.  He was found in possession of approximately £630, €263 and a small amount of other foreign currency.  When searched at police headquarters he was found to be in possession of 723 milligrams of cannabis resin (less than £5 in value) and 906 diazepam tablets (street value of £906).  These were accepted as being for personal use.

The following day discovered that Hepburn's Insurance had been broken into and a quantity of cash and other currencies stolen together with charity boxes, a bottle of wine and a cash tin.  The tin was subsequently found in the courtyard behind Chambers, as were the charity boxes and wine.  Two staff members from Chambers also reported that their rooms had been entered and items stolen.  A number of items were recovered outside Normans.  A pair of gloves stolen from one of the rooms was round inside Hepburn's Insurance.

Scene of Crime Officer found a fingerprint mark and a partial footwear mark which upon forensic analysis matched the fingerprints and trainers worn by the defendant on the night in question.  He had undertaken an untidy search of the premises at Hepburn's.

Not particularly cooperative in interview either relying upon "no comment" answers or claiming he could not remember anything due to his level of intoxication.

The defendant is still subject to the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994, and the Crown contended that only a custodial sentence was appropriate and that all three criteria under Article 4(2) were applicable.

Details of Mitigation:

Crown

Guilty plea entered on Indictment and residual credit for youth.  Identified as being of high risk of re-offending.  Had wilfully failed to take advantage of the chance given to him by the Court on the previous occasion.  He declined the assistance of the probation department to help find employment and stable accommodation.  Only completed 5 hours of Community Service and his subsequent attendance had been unacceptable both in terms of attitude and behaviour.  Was due to be breached for non-compliance with the Court's previous orders prior to the commission of further offences.

Defence

His youth and the relevant principles for the Court when sentencing a young offender were emphasised.  Guilty plea.  The defendant no longer wished to remain in Jersey and was seeking a transfer to a UK prison where thereafter he would stay with an aunt.  Looking to make a clean break/fresh start.  Invited Court to show an element of leniency.

Previous Convictions:

Fifteen convictions for a total of 50 offences, including 16 for breaking and entry, larceny, possession of an offensive weapon, malicious damage, receiving stolen goods, possession of cannabis, false pretence, no insurance, driving whilst disqualified and disorderly on licensed premises.

Conclusions:

Breach of Probation and Community Service Orders 22 December 2010

Count 1:	No separate penalty.
Count 2:	18 months' youth detention.
Count 3:	18 months' youth detention, concurrent.
Count 4:	1 month's youth detention, concurrent.
Count 5:	18 months' youth detention, concurrent.

Current Indictment

Count 1:	2 years' youth detention, consecutive to 22 December 2010 breach.
Count 2:	2 years' youth detention, concurrent.
Count 3:	2 years' youth detention, concurrent.
Count 4:	1 month's youth detention, concurrent.
Count 5:	9 months' youth detention, concurrent.

Total: 3 years' and 6 months' youth detention.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

When the defendant had been sentenced by the Royal Court on the 22^nd December, 2010 he had been told in very clear terms that he was being given a chance.  Within 2 months committed a series offences which were particularly mean in that he had broken into two employees' rooms and stolen personal items from them and also stole two charity boxes.  The defendant may think that he has had difficulties but he clearly did not think about the effect his actions would have upon the two occupants or upon the charities which included an organisation which assisted persons dying from cancer often as young as the defendant.  There was no choice other than a custodial sentence.  For the record the Court noted that he was still a young offender and, therefore, the provisions of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994 applied and the Court concluded that there was no other way of dealing with him due to his failure to respond to non-custodial penalties and he was either unable or unwilling to respond to them and the totality of his offending was so serious that a non-custodial sentence could not be justified.  The Court stated that they did not think that he was a hopeless case and the Court expressed the hope that he could make something of his life.  It was shown that he could work hard/obtain qualifications from how he had behaved in prison.  The Court felt able to slightly reduce the Crown's conclusions because of his youth/guilty plea.

Breach of Probation and Community Service Orders 22 December 2010

Count 1:	No separate penalty.
Count 2:	18 months' youth detention.
Count 3:	18 months' youth detention, concurrent.
Count 4:	1 month's youth detention, concurrent.
Count 5:	18 months' youth detention, concurrent.

Current Indictment

Count 1:	18 months' youth detention, consecutive to 22 December 2010 breach.
Count 2:	18 month's youth detention, concurrent.
Count 3:	18 months' youth detention, concurrent.
Count 4:	1 months' youth detention, concurrent.
Count 5:	9 months' youth detention, concurrent.

Total: 3 years' youth detention.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.

Previous orders discharged.

J. C. Gollop, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. W. R. Bell for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        When you were sentenced by the Court in December 2010 you were told in clear terms that you were being given a chance and that the Court hoped that you would take advantage of it.  But within two months you committed the same kind of offence, except that this time they were particularly mean.  You broke into the private rooms of two employees and stole from them, and you stole from charity boxes, including one from the Jersey Hospice.  Now you may think that you have been hard done by but you were prepared to steal from an organisation which looks after those who are dying from cancer, including some people who are as young as you.  You probably did not think of that at that time, but you need to think whether that is really the kind of person you are.  You leave us with no choice but to impose a custodial sentence. 

2.        We record for the purposes of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994 that a custodial sentence is being imposed because no other way of dealing with you is appropriate, first because you have a history of failing to comply with non-custodial sentences and are unable or unwilling to comply with them, and secondly because the totality of the offending is so serious that a non-custodial sentence cannot be justified. 

3.        Before you leave the Court we want to tell you that we do not think that you are a hopeless case, you have shown that you can achieve qualifications in the Prison, you have worked in the Prison kitchens and you worked towards an NVQ there, and the Court hopes that when you have served your sentence you will make something of your life because it is not essential to spend your youth behind bars and it is not a good way to do it.

4.        We are going to impose a sentence which takes account of the totality factor and we are going to modify the conclusions of the Crown Advocate slightly for that reason, and also because of the submissions made by your counsel, both as to your youth and to the guilty plea which you entered.

5.        The sentence of the Court is that on the earlier Indictment you will be sentenced to 18 months' youth detention and on the Indictment for which you are to be sentenced today 18 months' youth detention in total to be consecutive with the earlier sentence making a total of 3 years' youth detention.

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

Authorities

Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994.

Whelan's Aspects of Sentencing.

AG v Rawlinson [2008] JRC 132.

AG v Rawlinson [2010] JRC 236.

AG v Cameron [2008] JRC 182.