Freely Available British and Irish Public Legal Information
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
Jersey Unreported Judgments
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> AG v Hutcheson [2018] JRC 157A (31 August 2018)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2018/2018_157A.html
Cite as: [2018] JRC 157A
[New search] [Help]
Inferior Number Sentencing - drugs - importation - Class B - possession - Class A and Class B
|
Before : |
T. J. Le Cocq, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Thomas and Ronge. |
The Attorney General
-v-
John Alexander Hutcheson
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). |
|
4 counts of: |
Possession of a controlled drug contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978.(Counts 3,4,5 and 6). |
Age: 42.
Plea: Guilty
Details of Offence:
A Customs Officer on duty at Postal Headquarters seized a suspect package addressed to the defendant; it was found to contain just over 7 grams of herbal cannabis (Count 2). A search warrant was obtained, further Officers attended the address where the defendant answered the door, correctly assuming their visit related to cannabis he was expecting through the post. Having been informed the premises were to be searched the defendant immediately informed the officers he had a bag containing a quantity of amphetamine, some cannabis and a number of Ecstasy and diazepam tablets in his bedroom and a small bag containing a little cannabis and Ecstasy powder in his kitchen area. Other than the drug items indicated the only items of possible interest seized were the defendant's current iPhone and MacBook Pro and a couple of old mobile 'phones.
Examination of the drugs seized showed a total of 42 Ecstasy (MDMA) tablets and 589 mg of powder (Count 3), 219·35 grams of cannabis resin (Count 4), 331·94 grams of powder/paste containing between 1%-6% amphetamine by weight (Count 5) and seven 10mg diazepam tablets which were not prescribed to the defendant.
Extensive analysis of the 'phone downloads (in excess of 80K items) evidenced a previous postal importation of 6 grams of herbal cannabis (Count 1); the MacBook Pro revealed nothing of relevance.
The defendant was fully co-operative throughout, openly admitted arranging both the postal importations and provided explanations for his stockpile of drugs which he steadfastly maintained were purely for personal use. A Drug Expert who reviewed the evidence and the defendant's circumstances concluded the defendant's explanations were plausible.
Details of Mitigation:
Immediately co-operative, early indication of guilty pleas. Father of three providing day care of two-year-old daughter for former partner, also some weekends. Defendant had suffered back and leg injuries three years earlier when he fell from a roof while working as a satellite TV installer/engineer, employment in which he had been for many years. Claimed all drugs were for self-medication following negative side-effects of prescribed drugs over the prolonged period. Was awaiting further interventions for pain and mobility issues. Had been financially solvent when working, funds boosted when £17K car sold being surplus to current requirements, leaving him able to fund bulk drug purchases. Support of family, ex-partner and former employer.
Previous Convictions:
Seven offences recorded in Jersey between 1996 and 2001 included four for possession of drugs. Twenty five offences in UK between 2004 and 2007 restricted to dishonesty, sentences were suggestive of the defendant having a drug problem during that time.
Conclusions:
|
Count 1: |
1 month's imprisonment. |
|
Count 2: |
1 month's imprisonment, consecutive |
|
Count 3: |
15 months' imprisonment, consecutive. |
|
Count 4: |
5 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 5: |
15 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 6: |
No separate penalty. |
Total: 16 months' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
The Court stated that the Crown's conclusions could not be faulted, however in light of the mitigation available felt able to treat the case as exceptional, imposing a 12 month Probation Order and a 220 Hour Community Service Order, the non-custodial equivalent of the 16 month sentence of imprisonment sought by the Crown..
|
Count 1: |
12 month Probation Order together with 220 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 16 months' imprisonment. |
|
Count 2: |
12 month Probation Order together with 220 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 16 months' imprisonment, consecutive. |
|
Count 3: |
12 month Probation Order together with 220 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 16 months' imprisonment, consecutive. |
|
Count 4: |
12 month Probation Order together with 220 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 16 months' imprisonment, consecutive. |
|
Count 5: |
12 month Probation Order together with 220 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 16 months' imprisonment, consecutive. |
|
Count 6: |
No separate penalty. |
Total: 12 month Probation Order together with 220 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 16 months' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.
R. C. P. Pedley, Esq; Crown Advocate.
Advocate C. Hall for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. You are to be sentenced for six counts relating to importation and possession of illegal drugs. You imported 6 grams of herbal cannabis via postal importation, a Class B drug; and 7 grams of the same drug also by postal importation. You were in possession of 42 tablets and 589 mg of Ecstasy, a Class A drug and possession of cannabis resin, amphetamines and 7 tablets of diazepam. All of this offending came to light as a result of interception of a postal importation and the subsequent execution of a search warrant.
2. The values of the drugs have been set out by the Crown in the Statement of Facts and, as the Crown has said, the total street value is between £24,470 and £32,329.
3. Notwithstanding these quantities, we accept that these drugs were entirely for your personal use and we also accept that they were not intended by you for recreational purposes. That is not an excuse. You chose to use unlawful drugs to self-medicate and that is something that the Court cannot and does not condone.
4. You do not have a clean record and you have previous convictions which have been referred to by the Crown. You are assessed in the reports as posing a medium risk of reconviction.
5. We have accordingly given anxious consideration to what mitigation is available to you and whether we may treat that mitigation as exceptional. It is true that you were completely co-operative with the police and the prosecution authorities. You made ready admissions throughout the process and you have pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity. But that is not the mitigation that is necessarily of itself exceptional, that is a feature of many cases. We have had regard however, to the references that have been provided on your behalf. They speak extremely well of a man who is committed to his family, notwithstanding his difficulties, and is when he is capable of working a valued employee. We have also had regard to the contents of the Social Enquiry Report, the details of which were not deployed in open court and to the various other documents that we have seen including specifically the report from your General Practioner which has enabled us to understand better the challenges that you have faced.
6. We think that we are in a position to treat this as an exceptional case. Accordingly you will be sentenced to a Probation Order of 12 months and you will perform 220 hours' Community Service which is the direct equivalent of 16 months imprisonment. The Crown cannot be faulted for its conclusions which in our view but for the consideration that we have given to your circumstances were entirely merited.
7. You will not be surprised that I give you this warning. You have been given a quite exceptional opportunity here to address the challenges that you have faced and you have improperly tried to address by the use of drugs. You have a medical opportunity coming up and we strongly hope that you will be in a position to resume life as a productive member of society.
8. If you breach any of the terms of your Probation Order, if you fail to perform your Community Service Order or have any reason to be back before this Court again you must assume that the Court will take the view that you have wasted this exceptional chance that we are giving you, and that you will face almost inevitably a custodial sentence. We strongly urge that you take the maximum advantage of the support that will be provided to you during the course of the Probation Order and we see signs within the paperwork that you will be prepared entirely to do that and in part that has informed our decision.
9. We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.
10. We note that you are going in for an operation. If you are assiduous in carrying out your Community Service obligations, and there is no difficulty with that, and more time is required to discharge the order finally because of the operation, and we will be need to be fully informed, then it is open to you through counsel to make an application to the Court for an extension of time to perform Community Service, but that is only in circumstances where you are prejudiced in doing it by your operation.
Authorities
Campbell & Ors v AG [1995] JLR 136
AG-v-Fernandes [2015] JRC 198B
AG-v-Le Coguiec [2017] JRC 120