Jersey Unreported Judgments

Superior Number Sentencing - drugs - importation and possession - Class A and B.

[2012]JRC086

Royal Court

(Samedi)

25 April 2012

Before     :

M. C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Bailiff, and Jurats Clapham, Le Cornu, Fisher, Marett-Crosby, Nicolle and Olsen.

The Attorney General

-v-

Abdul Rasheed Buhari

Anthony Martin Larwood

Muhammed Yasin Uddin

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused were remanded by the Inferior Number on 16th March, 2012, following guilty pleas to the following charges:-

Abdul Rasheed Buhari

1 count 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 (Count 1).
1 count of:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 2).

Age:  29.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Uddin was a friend of Larwood and also knew Buhari.  Larwood lived in London near to Buhari.  Uddin lived in Jersey and was to be the recipient of the heroin once imported. 

In November 2011 Larwood was approached by two men and asked to undertake a drugs importation into Jersey, he initially agreed to this and was supplied with the drug but later withdrew from the arrangement.  The men then arranged for Buhari to act as the "mule" and carry the drug, whilst Larwood would accompany him as the "minder". 

On 9^th November, 2011, Larwood and Buhari flew to Jersey.  The arrival of the two men was monitored by the police and they were later arrested together.  At the police station Buhari was found to be in possession of 113 mg of herbal cannabis (Count 2) and he later excreted two condom wrapped packages containing a total of 26.73 grams of heroin.  Uddin was also arrested in Jersey that day. 

Telephone analysis revealed links between all three men.  A number of calls and texts were made from Larwood to Uddin shortly after he met up with Buhari in Jersey. 

Larwood was to be given £500 for expenses and would get a further £600 when he delivered Buhari to Uddin.  Uddin was to receive £500 for his role in the importation.  Buhari claimed that he had been at a party at Larwood's flat the night before the importation when he and Larwood had talked about coming to Jersey.  He said that he had only travelled to Jersey to recover some monies that Uddin owed to him.  Buhari admitted that the cannabis was his, but initially claimed to have no knowledge of how the heroin came to be secreted in his anus, claiming it must have been placed there by someone else, when he fell asleep at the party the night before he travelled. 

Details of Mitigation:

Previous good character and low risk of reoffending.  The guilty plea was viewed as inevitable and although some credit would be given, a full third discount was inappropriate.  The defendant had offered to assist the police although this offer was never acted upon in light of the co-defendants' guilty pleas prior to committal. 

Previous Convictions:

None.

Conclusions:

The Crown had regard to the guidelines set out in the case of Rimmer Lusk and Bade-v-AG [2001] JLR 373 and invited the Court to adopt a starting point for each of the defendants of 8 years' imprisonment. 

Count 1:	5 years' imprisonment.
Count 2:	2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 5 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation Order in the sum of £175 sought.

Recommendation for deportation sought.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The three defendants imported 27 grams of heroin with a potential value of £27,000.  Uddin was already in Jersey and was to be the recipient of the drug; Buhari, at the last minute, agreed to act as the mule and Larwood was the minder.  The Court felt that the role of Larwood and Uddin was greater than that of Buhari and decided that the correct starting points were Buhari: 8 years, Larwood and Uddin: 8½ years.  The Court had regard to the following factors:-

Buhari: Late guilty plea; low risk of reoffending; references and letter of remorse and the defendant's offer to assist the police. 

Larwood: Guilty plea, although not at the earliest opportunity.  Poor record of offending and in particular twelve previous convictions for drugs offences.  References and letter of remorse. 

Uddin: Early guilty plea; admissions made to the police.  The defendant's letter of remorse and the content of the social enquiry report.  The defendant had a conviction for a serious drugs offence. 

Count 1:	4 years' imprisonment.
Count 2:	2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 4 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation order made in the sum of £175.

Recommendation for deportation order made.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.

Anthony Martin Larwood

1 count 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 (Count 1).

Age:  29.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Buhari above.

Details of Mitigation:

Full one third credit given for guilty plea, however he was not of previous good character and was assessed as being at high risk of reoffending.

Previous Convictions:

18 previous convictions for inter alia Burglary and theft, possessing an offensive weapon, assault on police, 12 convictions for drugs offences (Class A and B). 

Conclusions:

See Buhari above.

Count 1:

5 years' imprisonment.

Total: 5 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation Order in the sum of £171.32 sought.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

As Buhari above.

Count 1:

5 years' imprisonment.

Total: 5 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation order made in the sum of £171.32.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.

Muhammed Yasin Uddin

1 count 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 (Count 1).

Age:  26.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Buhari above.

Details of Mitigation:

Full one third credit given for his guilty plea and co-operation with the police.  He was not of good character and his offending put him in breach of a conditional early release licence from a UK prison for a previous serious drugs offence.

Previous Convictions:

4 previous convictions for fraud, theft and a drugs conviction for importation of Class A drugs, resulting in a sentence of 6 years' imprisonment. 

Conclusions:

See Buhari above.

Count 1:

5 years' imprisonment.

Total: 5 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation Order in the sum of £175 sought.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

See Buhari above.

Count 1:

5 years' imprisonment.

Total: 5 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation order made in the sum of £175.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.

C. M. M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate P. S. Landick for Buhari.

Advocate J. C. Gollop for Larwood.

Advocate J. W. R. Bell for Uddin.

JUDGMENT

THE BAILIFF:

1.        The three of you were involved in the importation of 27 grams of heroin to Jersey with a street value of up to £27,000.  Uddin, you had recently moved to Jersey and you were the contact point here and you facilitated the transfer of money, as well as being the likely recipient of the drugs on behalf of others once the drugs arrived.  Buhari, you were the courier; you appear to have been approached at the last moment and you concealed the drugs internally.  Larwood, you were involved in paying money into an account for Uddin earlier; you initially agreed to import the drugs yourself but then decided not to; you acted as minder in order to ensure that Buhari and the drugs inside him were safely delivered to Uddin in Jersey.  You received £500 by way of expenses and you were to receive a further £600. 

2.        The first question we must decide is the right starting point.  We are concerned here with 27 grams, that falls within the 20-50 gram bracket in the leading case of Rimmer, Lusk, Bade and Others [2001] JLR 373 which suggests a starting point of between 8 and 10 years.  Slightly surprisingly, the Crown took the same starting point for you all and indeed, ended up with the same sentence for you all.  The Court considers that the involvement of Larwood and Uddin was greater than that of Buhari.  Furthermore, Uddin, you have a previous conviction for importing cocaine into the UK for which you received a sentence of 6 years' imprisonment.  And Larwood, you have twelve previous convictions for possession of drugs including cannabis, cocaine and ecstasy.  The leading case of Harrison-v-AG [2004] JLR 111 has made it clear that the existence of previous convictions for similar offences goes to the starting point and may increase the starting point beyond what it would otherwise be.  Taking into account your different roles and your different records, we think the correct level is a starting point of 8 years for Buhari and 8½ years for Larwood and Uddin.  

3.        We turn then to mitigation in each case starting with Buhari.  You have pleaded guilty but you did not do so very early.  The earlier one pleads guilty the greater the discount.  On the other hand you have no previous convictions, and that stands you in very good stead.  We have read your references, including from your partner and from the manager from Age UK in Tower Hamlets, which show that there is a good side to you.  We have read the background report which says that you are at low risk of reoffending and we have read your letter of remorse.  It also said that you offered to help in terms of providing evidence at one stage, although that was in fact not progressed and not relied upon.  We have had regard to all the mitigation available on the papers before us. 

4.        Buhari, in your case, we think the correct final sentence on Count 1 is 4 years' imprisonment, with 2 weeks' concurrent on Count 2, making a total of 4 years' imprisonment. 

5.        In relation to deportation, we consider your continued presence in Jersey would be detrimental to the community; we note that you have no connections with Jersey whatsoever and that any order made here for deportation would not prevent you from residing in the UK unless the Secretary of State said so.  So in all the circumstances we are going to recommend your deportation at the conclusion of your sentence. 

6.        Larwood, you pleaded guilty, not at the earliest opportunity but nevertheless reasonably early, although you denied involvement initially.  You have a poor record including twelve previous convictions for possession of drugs, as we have said, as well as other offences.  We have read your references, including in particular one from the mother of one of your children and we have read your letter to us.  We have read carefully the background report and all the information it contains and that which your advocate has said, and we have had regard to all the mitigation available on the papers, but in our judgment the conclusion of the Crown in this case, albeit they had taken, as we see it, an erroneous starting point, was correct. 

7.        Larwood, in your case the sentence on the one count you face is one of 5 years' imprisonment. 

8.        Finally we turn to Uddin.  You too pleaded guilty, in your case from an early stage, and you had made immediate admissions when interviewed by the police.  It was clearly a plea of guilty of real value.  We have read your letter of remorse; we have read the background report and the psychological report.  As against that you have a previous conviction, as we have already said which has been taken into account in the starting point.  All in all we think the Crown's conclusions in your case were correct. 

9.        Uddin, in your case the sentence is one of 5 years' imprisonment. 

10.      We order the forfeiture and destruction of all the drugs. 

Authorities

Rimmer Lusk and Bade-v-AG [2001] JLR 373.

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JLR 111.

Camacho-v-AG [2007] JLR 462.