Jersey Unreported Judgments

Superior Number Sentencing - receiving stolen property - driving without insurance - illegal entry with intent - robbery.

[2015]JRC154A

Royal Court

(Samedi)

13 July 2015

Before     :

Sir Michael Birt, Commissioner, and Jurats Fisher, Marett-Crosby, Sparrow, Morgan and Clapham.

The Attorney General

-v-

Justin James Samson

Brian James Hawkins

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused were remanded by the Inferior Number on 1^st May, 2015, following guilty pleas to the following charges:

Justin James Samson

First Indictment

1 count of:

Receiving stolen property (Count 1).

Third indictment

1 count of:	Illegal entry with intent (Count 1).
1 count of:	Robbery (Count 2).

Age:  33.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

First Indictment

On Monday 24^th November, 2014, a black holdall containing a variety of medication and a blue cash tin was found at the rear of the German Tunnels at the St Aubin end of the Railway Walk.  The items appeared to have been dumped and there were tablets and blister packs spread across the path.  Samson's fingerprints were recovered from cash tin.  The holdall and its contents were confirmed as stolen from Sanctuary House, a charity, where Samson had been staying at the time. 

Second Indictment

On Sunday 30^th November, 2014, Hawkins was involved in a two vehicle accident.  When police attended it was noted that the Windscreen Insurance Disc on Hawkins' car did not match the Registration Mark on the vehicle.  Hawkins was issued with words of advice and requested to bring his driving licence and insurance details to Police Headquarters within seven days, he failed to do so and now accepts that he was not insured. 

Third Indictment

Count 1 - illegal entry with intent; Count 2 - robbery.

On Tuesday 2^nd December, 2014, Hawkins drove Samson and two other unnamed individuals to Les Cinqs Chenes.  Samson and the two unnamed individuals then entered the flat of the victim who was 71 and in poor health.  The victim was awoken when his duvet was pressed across his face with force.  The male holding him down said that they wanted 'pills and money', and told someone else to look around the flat.  Whilst Samson and the others were in the flat, Hawkins entered but did not participate in the robbery.  After approximately five minutes the victim was released. 

The victim went to lock his door and found his keys had been taken as well as a pill box containing an assortment of pills.  After Hawkins and Samson were arrested a search was carried out of Hawkin' bedsit.  A pill bottle in the name of the victim for nortriptyline together with a notepad which had been stolen from the victim's flat were recovered from a bin in the bedsit. 

The victim was very shaken by the experience and said "At the time I thought they were going to smother (me) because he covered my face and held the blanket down with all his force, I thought I was going to die."  He describes how since the robbery he is "constantly worried".

Hawkins' guilty plea was entered on the basis that he had not known that Samson and the others were going to break into the flat of the victim and that he only entered the flat after he heard a "commotion".  He entered the flat but did not participate in the robbery or see what was happening in the flat.  Upon leaving the flat he waited in his car for Samson and the others and transported them away from Les Cinqs Chenes. 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea.

Previous Convictions:

Fifteen convictions for 128 offences, including fifty for theft and kindred offences.  Nine of these relate to breaking and entering and one in 2013 to larceny from a dwelling. 

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Count 1:

12 months' imprisonment.

Third Indictment

Count 1:	3 years' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 2:	5 years' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 5 years' imprisonment.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

First Indictment

Count 1:

6 months' imprisonment, consecutive to Count 2 of the Third Indictment.

Third Indictment

Count 1:	3 years' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 2:	4 years' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 4½ years' imprisonment.

Brian James Hawkins

Second Indictment

1 count of:

Using a motor vehicle uninsured against third party risks, contrary to Article 2(1) of the Motor Traffic (Third Party Insurance)(Jersey) Law 1948 (Count 1).

Third indictment

1 count of:

Illegal entry with intent (Count 1).

Age:  36.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Samson above.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, remorse, limited role in the illegal entry with intent.

Previous Convictions:

Fifteen convictions for 70 offences including 18 for theft and kindred offences and 11 offences of driving without insurance, one occurring in the last 5 years.  He has two convictions for breaking and entering commercial premises in 2003.

Conclusions:

Second Indictment

Count 1:

6 months' imprisonment and disqualification from driving for a period of 4 years.

Third Indictment

Count 1:

3 years' imprisonment, consecutive to the Second Indictment.

Total: 3½ years' imprisonment and disqualification from driving for a period of 4 years.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Second Indictment

Count 1:

6 months' imprisonment, consecutive to Count 2 of the Third Indictment and disqualification from driving for a period of 4 years.

Third Indictment

Count 1:

2½ years' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 3 years' imprisonment and disqualification from driving for a period of 4 years.

R. C. P. Pedley Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. W. R. Bell for Samson.

Advocate A. M. Harrison for Hawkins.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        You both have a long history of drug misuse.  You have poor records which include numerous offences for dishonesty, often committed when under the influence of drugs or in order to get money for drugs.  As a result of your drug misuse and previous convictions, you both also have poor work records.  Now you are before the Court again.  Samson, you have pleaded guilty to the illegal entry and robbery and receiving and Hawkins, you have pleaded guilty to the illegal entry and driving without insurance. 

2.        Samson, the receiving offence was a particularly mean one.  Following the breakup of your relationship you were living at Sanctuary House, a charity which provides accommodation for men in your position.  Despite this you received a bag containing medication and some £10 in cash which had been stolen from that house.  The most serious offence, of course, is the robbery and the linked illegal entry.  Samson, you gained entry to the room of the 71 year old male victim who was in bed.  A duvet was pressed over his face and it led him to believe that, if it were not for his tracheotomy, he would have been unable to breathe.  You took some of his pills.  The Court has read the victim impact statement and we know that you both have as well, and you will have seen from that the effect that this robbery has had on him. 

3.        Hawkins, you have pleaded guilty to illegal entry on the basis that you drove Samson to the house in question but did not know that a robbery was intended.  However, you went to see what was going on and you entered the victim's room whilst the offence was taking place.  You joined the enterprise, in effect, and drove Samson away afterwards.  So that is the basis of your plea to illegal entry. 

4.        Now, turning to Samson, we take note of your guilty plea and we do give you credit for that.  We have read what is in the background report and we are pleased to read of the constructive use you are making of your time in prison.  But robbery is a serious offence and robbery of someone in their home at night is particularly serious.  Nevertheless, we do accept the submission of Advocate Bell that, having regard to the particular circumstances of this case when compared with a number of the others, the sentence of 5 years is a little too high. 

5.        The sentence on the count of robbery is one of 4 years; the sentence on the illegal entry, 3 years' concurrent.  In relation to the receiving, we think that must be consecutive, we do not follow why the Crown made that concurrent.  Nevertheless we think in the circumstances 12 months is too much so it is going to be 6 months, consecutive on that, so the total is 4½ years' imprisonment. 

6.        In relation to Hawkins we again give you credit for the guilty plea, we have read the background report, we have particularly been impressed with the efforts you are trying to make in prison to wean yourself off your drug dependency, we have read what has been said there, we have also read the letters from your wife, from you, and from others and we hope very much that you mean what you say in those letters.  Again, we think that for your particular role, the sentence should be reduced a little.  This is not to underplay the seriousness of people breaking into houses at night but the Crown has chosen to accept your version of events and therefore the Crown is bound by that.  Therefore we must sentence on that version and that version is that you had no idea this was going to take place and you only joined it at the last moment; your sole involvement was, in effect, to drive them away.  In those circumstances we think the Crown's conclusions are just a little too high. 

7.        In the circumstances, on the count of illegal entry, it is 2½ years' imprisonment; the driving whilst disqualified, we think that given your numerous previous convictions for that offence 6 months is entirely correct and that is to be consecutive, so the total is 3 years' imprisonment.  We cannot agree to the suggestion of a non-custodial sentence in all the circumstances, and you are disqualified from driving for 4 years. 

Authorities

Whelan on Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Court of Jersey 3rd Edition.

Gill v AG [1999] JLR N 18c.

Gill-v-AG 1999/160.

AG v Bailey [2009] JLR N 19.

AG-v-Bailey [2009] JRC 077.

AG v Da Silva [1997] JLR N 14A.

AG-v-Da Silva 1997/218.

AG v Wylie [2002] JLR N 6.

AG-v-Wylie 2002/13.

Stopher and Louis v AG [1990] JLR 222

AG v Botting and Others [2003] JRC 105.

AG v Samson [2013] JRC 081.

AG v King [2013] JRC 048.

R v Webbe [2002] 1 Cr App R (S) 22.