Jersey Unreported Judgments

Superior Number Sentencing - drugs- possession - supply - Class A and Class B

[2019]JRC124

Royal Court

(Samedi)

1 July 2019

Before     :

Sir William Bailhache, Bailiff, and Jurats Olsen, Pitman, Christensen, Hughes and Grime

The Attorney General

-v-

Elias Campbell Benyoucef

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 29^th March, 2019, following guilty pleas to the following charges:

2 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply contrary to Article 8(2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 1 and Count 2).
3 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 3, Count 4 and Count 5).
1 count of:	Possession of a utensil for the purposes of committing an offence contrary to Article 10 of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 6).

Age:  23. 

Plea: Guilty. 

Details of Offence:

At 7.30am on 17^th January, 2019, States of Jersey Police executed a search warrant at a two-bedroomed flat in Wellington Road, St Saviour ("the property"). 

 

The Police gained access by breaching the front door.  They found the defendant in one bedroom and a second male ("the flatmate") in the other.  Both were detained for the purposes of a drugs search.  The defendant was reluctant to leave his bedroom and had to be restrained and handcuffed.

 

In his room the Police found two black shoulder bags on the floor by his bed.  One contained 572.87 grams of herbal cannabis.  The second bag held a British Airways travel bag, which contained 30.49 grams of MDMA powder and 8.76 grams of cannabis resin.  A tin with 'Madeira' inscribed on its surface was also found in the bag, which contained two whole and two half MDMA tablets.

 

In the kitchen was a tin which contained 288 milligrams of MDMA.  A spoon with MDMA residue and electronic scales with cannabis residue on its surface were also found.  

 

The defendant and the flatmate were arrested and transported to Police HQ. 

 

The herbal cannabis was found to have a street value of between £11,440.00 and £14,300.00 and the MDMA powder was found to have a value between £2,400.00 and £3,000.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, youth, troubled upbringing, his role was to mind the commercial quantities of MDMA powder and herbal cannabis and in payment he was given herbal cannabis for personal use

Previous Convictions:

The defendant has eleven convictions for twenty six offences including four drug offences.

Conclusions:

Count 1:	5½ years' imprisonment.
Count 2:	6 months' imprisonment, consecutive to Count 1.
Count 3:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 5:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 6:	1 week's imprisonment, concurrent.

Breach of Community Service Order - order to be discharged and 6 months' imprisonment to be imposed in its place

Total: 6½ years' imprisonment. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and utensils sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Starting point 8 years' imprisonment.

Count 1:	4 years' imprisonment.
Count 2:	6 months' imprisonment, concurrent to Count 1.
Count 3:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 5:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 6:	1 week's imprisonment, concurrent.

Breach of Community Service Order - order to be discharged and 6 months' imprisonment to be imposed in its place. 

Total: 4½ years' imprisonment. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and utensils made. 

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

Advocate M. J. Haines for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE BAILIFF:

1.        You are here charged on an Indictment which contains a number of counts in relation to drugs offences.  The most serious is Count 1 which is the possession of MDMA powder with intent to supply.  There are also charges of possession of cannabis, herbal and resin, again with intent to supply.

2.        The facts were that the police found two black shoulder bags on the floor by your bed.  One contained an amount of herbal cannabis, the second bag contained a British Airways travel bag which contained the MDMA powder and a small quantity of cannabis resin.  There were 2½ MDMA tablets.  On examination the cannabis resin was found to weigh 8.76 grams, the herbal cannabis 572.87 grams, the MDMA powder 30.49 grams.  The investigating officers concluded that the herbal cannabis had a street value of between £11,440 and £14,300, the MDMA powder between £2,400.00 and £3,000.  The tablets were valued at between £30 and £40 and the cannabis resin between £120 and £160. 

3.        As clearly you understand, the Court operates on a sentencing system which has been established at Court of Appeal level in the case of Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373 in relation to Class A drugs, and we have considered what the starting point ought to be.  We have reached the view that on that count the starting point should be 8 years' imprisonment, which is at the very bottom of that band.  We have reached that conclusion having regard to your overall participation in drug trafficking and the basis of plea which you have entered and which the Crown has accepted.  We have gone on to consider whether there should be a Valler uplift.  Your counsel says that the quantities of cannabis are not significant and we agree with that and we are not going to apply any Valler uplift in relation to the cannabis charges.  We also accept your counsel was correct in saying that there had been double counting by the Crown in its conclusions in suggesting that there should not only be a Valler uplift but also there should be a consecutive sentence. 

4.        So we come to consider what the mitigation is that you have and there is no doubt that the first item of mitigation which is an important one is your guilty plea and we take that into account.  We have also taken into account the background which you have which is clearly troubling.  We understand the point in relation to your parents, and we have noted that the convictions which you have may in fact make it difficult, if not impossible, for you to get into Morocco to find them in the future, and that is a piece of special mitigation in the background circumstances that you have, that we have taken into account.  We have also noted your good employment record and your references and that you are making constructive use of prison time. 

5.        Having regard to all those features we think the right sentence to impose in relation to Count 1 is 4 years' imprisonment, and in relation to Count 2; 6 months' imprisonment, concurrent.  Count 3; 1 month's imprisonment, concurrent, Count 4; 1 month's imprisonment, concurrent, Count 5; 1 month's imprisonment, concurrent, Count 6; 1 week's imprisonment, concurrent. 

6.        As a result of your offending you are in breach of the Community Service Order which we will order to be discharged and we will impose 6 month's imprisonment, consecutive in its place.

7.        You are sentenced to a total of 4 years and 6 month's imprisonment, based on the structure which I have just outlined.

8.        I just want to add this to you.  It is clear from what you have said to us in your letter and in the work that you are doing at the prison, that you do realise where you are in your life and you are a young man, you are 23 years old only.  Your life is ahead of you and this will seem like a very long sentence, but there is still a long life after you and you can turn it around.  What you need to do is to take this sentence constructively, apply it constructively, and you have that employment offer you hope, therefore when you come out.  I do suggest you keep in touch with your prospective employer during your sentence, write him a letter from time to time, make sure he does not forget you, and there is something to look forward to and you can be positive about it and that is the way to look at this sentence.  The fact is that the structure of sentencing and drug trafficking is there because it recognises drug trafficking is a serious offence and that is why you are getting the sentence you are. 

9.        The Court orders the forfeiture and destruction of drugs and utensils.

Authorities

Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373. 

Valler v AG [2002] JLR 383

Allardice v AG [2013] JCA 143. 

Campbell v AG [1995] JLR 136.