Jersey Unreported Judgments

Superior Number Sentencing - drugs - importation - Classes A and B - assault

[2016]JRC218A

Royal Court

(Samedi)

24 November 2016

The Attorney General

-v-

Richard John Burton

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 19^th August, 2016, following guilty pleas to the following charges:

Age:  46.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

The defendant was stopped along with his partner after arriving at Jersey Airport.  He told officers he had nothing to declare.  A search of his luggage revealed drug paraphernalia which included scales, new and old bongs which gave a positive reaction to the presence of cannabinoids. 

A search of the person gave a negative result.  The defendant was taken to Customs whereby the defendant became awkward and volatile.  The defendant was witnessed putting his hands down the back of his shorts and placing something in his mouth.  The packages were removed from the defendant and were found to contain cannabis. 

Officers entered the suite later on that day again as the defendant had his hands hidden under his body.  On entry the defendant refused to show his hands to the officer.  A struggle ensued and further officers came to assist during which the defendant spat at an officer as he attempted to place a spit hood over the defendant's face.  The defendant when arrested and cautioned told the officer to "fuck off."

The following day the defendant produced four plastic wrapped packages which were found to contain in total 16 clear resalable bags which contained cocaine, amphetamines, cannabis and MDMA. 

The defendant in Interview admitted the drugs were for his and his partner's personal use and were to be consumed during their stay in Jersey. 

The Crown accepted a not guilty plea to Count 4. 

Details of Mitigation:

Full credit for a guilty plea. 

Previous Convictions:

Previous offences for possession of Class A and B drugs as well as intent to supply cannabis and failing to attend/provide a sample of bodily fluid for drug testing. 

Conclusions:

Total: 4 years' imprisonment.

Confiscation Order sought in the sum of £860.00.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Total: 3 years' and 5 months' imprisonment.

Confiscation Order hearing to be postponed until 12^th January, 2017, at 2.30pm.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.

C. R. Baglin, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate P. S. Landick for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are to be sentenced today for seven counts of evading prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug, an array of Class A and Class B drugs, and to one count of assault on a customs officer.  The Crown accepts that these drugs were for your personal use, together with your partner with whom you shared them, and although there would have been an element of social supply in the sense that you provided, or would have provided those drugs to your partner for his use as well, we have disregarded that element in our thinking in the circumstances of this case.  It could not be said that you were wholly cooperative with the authorities and, indeed, as we have said, you have assaulted a customs officer by spitting on him and we will return to that element later. 

2.        Your record is not a good one and you have previous drugs offences.  We note the mitigation available to you.  You have entered the plea of guilty at the earliest opportunity and although perhaps this was an inevitable plea, nonetheless in the circumstances of this case it has value and we will allow a full discount for that element of mitigation.  We have also taken into account the other mitigation contained in the social enquiry report, and your remorse, which we accept as genuine and which is reflected in the steps that you have taken to detoxify from your drug use. 

3.        Before coming onto sentence we deal first with the question of Confiscation.  In our view that is a matter that must be adjourned for argument to another occasion and we adjourn it to 12^th January at 2.30pm for the Court to consider it further. 

4.        There is no realistic alternative to a custodial sentence, and the only question for us is what the duration of that should be.  The cases on which the Crown has relied are cases well-known to this Court but, in their terms, they apply primarily to commercial importation and we are not persuaded that in the somewhat unusual circumstances of this case we should apply those guidelines in full rigor. 

5.        Accordingly we are going to make a reduction in the starting points moved for by the Crown which will result in a somewhat lower sentence at the end, and the position is as follows.  With regard to Count 1; we apply a starting point of 5 years' imprisonment and allowing for all available mitigation, we impose a sentence of 2½ years imprisonment.  For Count 2; we adopt the same starting point and the same sentence of 2½ years imprisonment.  For Count 3; 1 month's imprisonment, for Count 5; 1 month's imprisonment, for Count 6; 3 month's imprisonment, and for Count 7; we adopt a starting point of 6 years' imprisonment which we reduce to 3 years' imprisonment to allow for available mitigation, and for Count 8; a sentence of 1 month's imprisonment.  Those are all to be served concurrently which, in so far as those are concerned, will amount to a sentence of 3 years' imprisonment.  However, we do not take the same view as the Crown does with regard to the assault on the customs officer (Count 9).  As the Court has said on many occasions in the past, an assault on a customs officer or a police officer or an ambulance person carrying out their public duty is to be treated as a quite distinct matter, they are to be protected and normally that will give rise to a consecutive sentence.  We agree that the appropriate duration for Count 9 is one of 5 month's imprisonment but we think it should be served consecutively with the other sentence making a total of 3 years' and 5 month's imprisonment. 

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

Authorities

Campbell-v-AG [1995] JLR 136.

Rimmer & Others-v-AG [2001] JLR 373.

Bonnar & Noon-v-AG [2001] JLR 626.

AG-v-Grodowski & Korszen [2016] JRC 166F

AG-v-Capuano [2013] JRC 084.

AG-v-Pestana [2013] JRC 148A.

AG-v-Sanguy [2012] JRC 170A.