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 >> The Attorney General v Angelo Gabriel De Sa Fernandes [2021] JRC 287 (16 November 2021)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2021/2021_287.html
Cite as: [2021] JRC 287
[New search] [Help]
Superior Number Sentencing - Drugs - possession and supply - Class A and Class B
|
Before : |
R. J. MacRae, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Ramsden, Austin-Vautier and Averty |
The Attorney General
-v-
Angelo Gabriel De Sa Fernandes
Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 7th October, 2021, following a guilty plea to the following charges:
|
5 counts of: |
Possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply it to another, contrary to Article 8(2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978.(Counts 5-9) |
|
4 counts of: |
Being concerned in the supplying of, or in the making of an offer to supply, a controlled drug contrary to Article 5(c) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978. (Counts 10-13) |
Age: 21.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
On 6th November 2020, a drugs search was executed at the Defendant's home address. Although this search relates to drugs offences in respect of Counts 1 to 4 which have been left to lie on the file, items relevant to the remaining counts were found during this search including £1,095 cash in £10 and £20 denominations and the Defendant's iPhone.
On 9th December 2020 whilst the Defendant was on Police Bail, Police executed a second search warrant at his address. Cash and quantities of illegal drugs were found (Counts 5 to 9). In interview, the Defendant gave no comment answers to the majority of questions put to him.
The Defendant provided the PIN to his mobile telephone and a download was completed. The messages revealed that the Defendant was concerned in the supply of cocaine and cannabis (Counts 10 to 13). The drugs expert compiled a report and estimated the total value of the drugs at £1,616.
Details of Mitigation:
Benefit of early guilty pleas, no previous convictions, and of previous good character. The Defendant was 21 years old at the time of conviction and sentence, he was however, 20 years old at the time of his offending and therefore Article 4(2) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014 applied.
Previous Convictions:
No previous convictions.
Conclusions:
|
Count 5: |
Starting point 8 years' imprisonment. 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment. |
|
Count 6: |
6 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 7: |
1 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 8: |
4 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 9: |
Starting point 7 years' imprisonment. 3 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 10: |
Starting point 7 years' imprisonment. 3 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 11: |
3 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 12: |
12 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 13: |
12 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment.
Declaration of benefit sought in the sum of £2,811.
Confiscation order sought in the sum of £1,195.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
|
Count 5: |
Starting point 8 years' imprisonment. 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment. |
|
Count 6: |
6 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 7: |
1 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 8: |
4 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 9: |
Starting point 7 years' imprisonment. 3 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 10: |
Starting point 7 years' imprisonment. 3 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 11: |
3 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 12: |
6 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 13: |
6 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment.
Declaration of benefit ordered in the sum of £2,811.
Confiscation order ordered in the sum of £1,195.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.
C. R. Baglin Esq., Crown Advocate.
Advocate J. Heywood for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. Angelo Gabriel De Sa Fernandes you are 21 years old and have no previous convictions. You were 20 years old when you committed these offences towards the end of last year.
2. On 9th December 2020, the police executed a search warrant at your address in St Helier. A month before they had executed a similar warrant and seized items including your iPhone and just over a £1,000 in cash. On this occasion they seized the following controlled drugs:-
(i) 9.219 grams of MDMA which constitute the drugs seized for the purpose of Count 5 on the Indictment, namely possession of a controlled drug with the intent to supply to another.
(ii) 913 milligrams of methylphenidate, the subject of Court 6 on the Indictment, possession with intent to supply to another.
(iii) 101.81 grams of synthetic cannabinoid, represented by Count 7 on the Indictment, namely possession with intent to supply to another.
(iv) 20 Tramadol tablets, the subject of Count 8 on the Indictment, possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply to another.
The police also seized a box containing £100 in cash and two digital scales which bore traces of MDMA and cannabis.
3. You were interviewed under caution in December 2020 and February 2021, and you gave no assistance to the police on either occasion responding to questions with no comment. However, you did give the police access to your iPhone and this gives rise to the five Counts from 9 to 13 on the Indictment to which you pleaded guilty, which evidence that you were supplying cannabis, cocaine and MDMA on at least five separate occasions to other people.
4. The police expert who considered the messages retrieved from your telephone shows that you were offering on a social media platform "Beans and Charley" which is code for MDMA and cocaine, and you also offered to sell "Banging Snow" namely high quality cocaine. These are Class A drugs that you were offering to sell. It is said that your messages bear the hallmarks of a person involved in the street supply of a variety of drugs on a commercial basis over a period of several months and that you are proactively seeking to supply these drugs to those third parties. You had an up to date deal list of at least 10 persons with whom you dealt drugs and a quantity of cash at home to which we have already referred. So, the Crown conclude that you were selling drugs to members of the public for a profit. The total value of the drugs seized was £1,616.
5. We treat your pleas of guilty as entered in the Royal Court at the first opportunity and we give you credit accordingly. In respect of Count 5, the most serious of the offences on the Indictment, we find that the starting point, having regard to the weight of the drugs and your role, is 8 years' imprisonment having regard to the case of Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373. The Defence accept the Crown's submission in respect of this and the other starting points identified by the Crown in this case.
6. In respect of Count 9, being the concern of the supply of MDMA and Counts 10 and 11, being concerned in the supply of cocaine, the offences relate to supply of Class A drugs to a single buyer where the quantity cannot be ascertained. Accordingly, we adopt the starting point of 7 years' imprisonment. It is not necessary for us to fix starting points in relation to the other offences and, having regard to the principle of totality, we propose to impose concurrent sentences in respect of these offences.
7. We note from the Probation Report that you are assessed as being at medium risk of reconviction. We note that you have had a difficult start in life which we have heard more about today and have poor coping skills. You suffer from a number of mental health difficulties including ADHD, anxiety and an incomplete diagnosis of bipolar affective disorder.
8. Although you are now 21, we take into account that you were 20 when these offences were committed and we sentence you as if you were 20, noting the approach in AG v Cameron [2008] JRC 182 where the court approved an English authority R v Ghafoor [2002] EWCA Crim 1857 in which Lord Justice Dyson held:
"The approach to be adopted where a defendant crosses a relevant age threshold between the date of the commission of the offence and the date of conviction should be now clear. The starting point is a sentence that the defendant would have been likely to receive if he had been sentenced at the date of commission of the offence."
9. Advocate Heywood could not have said more on your behalf today. He argued that you should be sentenced to a long Community Service Order equivalent to a sentence of 3 years' imprisonment, coupled with a Probation Order, on the footing that you are at a crossroads in your life and that you should be given a chance. It is said that you committed some of these offences because you were threatened with violence, but that is not (for this offence) mitigation, but merely a feature of the drug trafficking environment that you accept when you participated within it.
10. We note your genuine expression of remorse, your letter to the Court and your account as to the nature of your involvement saying that you were minding drugs for others who knew you were going to distribute and sell them to third parties. It is accepted on your behalf that your account, which is not accepted by the Crown, is not material to sentence.
11. We have had regard to the provisions of Article 4(2) of the Criminal Justice Young Offenders (Jersey) Law 2014 and by a majority the Jurats have been satisfied that the totality of this offending is so serious that a non-custodial sentence cannot be justified. Supplying Class A drugs to members of our community will in almost every case attract a significant custodial sentence in order to punish the offender, to act as a deterrent to others and equally importantly to protect the community in which we live.
12. We make the Confiscation Order sought by the Crown; certifying your benefit in the sum of £2,811 and making a confiscation order in the sum of £1,195.
13. We make a destruction order in relation to the drugs.
14. In the circumstances, and for the reasons advanced by the Crown, decline to recommend your deportation. We agree that your presence in the Island is plainly detrimental owing to the offences that you have committed, but we do not regard the second limb of the test for deportation set out in AG v Camacho [2007] JLR 462 as being satisfied, bearing in mind that you have been living in the Island since you were 9 years old and that your mother and your sister live here as well.
15. Accordingly, the sentences we impose on the Indictment are as follows: -
(i) Count 5 - 3½ years' imprisonment;
(ii) Count 6 - 6 months' imprisonment;
(iii) Count 7 - 1 year's imprisonment;
(iv) Count 8 - 4 months' imprisonment;
(v) Count 9 - 3 years' imprisonment;
(vi) Count 10 - 3 years' imprisonment;
(vii) Count 11 - 3 years' imprisonment;
(viii) Count 12 - 6 months' imprisonment;
(ix) Count 13 - 6 months' imprisonment. all to run concurrently making a total of 3 years and 6 months' imprisonment.
16. We hope that you use your time in custody wisely and acquire some of the skills referred to in the reports which will enable you to live a different life when you are released.
Authorities
R v Ghafoor [2002] EWCA Crim 1857.
Criminal Justice Young Offenders (Jersey) Law 2014
AG v Herd [2021] JRC 223
AG v Gilbraith and Rawlinson [2017] JRC 155
AG v Page et al [2012] JRC 131
AG v Cameron [2008] JLR Note 044