Jersey Unreported Judgments

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

[2021]JRC290

Royal Court

(Samedi)

18 November 2021

Before     :

R. J. MacRae, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Ronge, Austin-Vautier and Hughes

The Attorney General

-v-

Jordan Arun Jones

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 18^th November 2021, following guilty pleas to the following charges:

1 count of:	Being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of goods, contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law, 1999 (Count 1).
3 counts of;	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Counts 2, 3 and 7).
2 counts of:	Being concerned in the supply of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(c) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 4 and Count 6)

Age:    24.   

Plea: Guilty. 

Details of Offence:

Customs Officers examined package addressed to home address of Defendant: package sent from Brighton.  Defendant was born in and previously lived in Brighton.  Concealed within chocolate wrappers were four individually heat sealed and cling film wrapped packages of cannabis (Count 1).  Total weight 186.01 grams of cannabis resin; street value; £2,700-£3,700.  Defendant arrested and when interviewed denied all knowledge of postal importation.

 

Room was searched: 9.98grams of cannabis resin found in wooden box (Count 2).  Value: £150-£200.  A plastic wrap was found containing white powder: 501mg of MDMA (Count 3).  Value £40-£50.  Total cash of £4,378.59 seized of which £4,060 found hidden in a pair of trainers covered with socks: the bundles were wrapped etc indicative of drug dealing.  An examination of Defendant's employment history and financial records revealed unexplained cash.

 

As part of Operation Shark, a drug dealing operation conducted by the police the mobile phone of a third party was seized and examined: it contained messages passing between third party and the Defendant relating to the supply of Class A and Class B drugs over an approximate one year period. The messages indicate that Defendant collected significant sums of money in return for drugs supplied by him and arranged for regular importations of unspecified commodities by post.

 

Based on those messages Defendant pleaded guilty to the supply of 4 grams of MDMA ( Count 4 ) and the supply of 170grams of cannabis resin (Count 6). It was accepted that Defendant was buying bulk for personal use and then social supply to friends.  However, it was also clear that the Defendant was benefiting financially from these arrangements.  Defendant attended at Customs for charging: had in his possession 3.73 grams of cannabis resin (Count 7).

 

Defendant's phone showed use of 'Wickr' and 'Signal' applications: these applications encrypted message and messages cannot be recovered forensically.

 

Crown's case was that offences represented the bare minimum of the Defendant's drug dealing activities.

 

Financial analysis showed Defendant had a proceeds of crime figure of £8,300.39.  Confiscation order of £4,491 made (not opposed).

 

'Starting point' for Count 4 : 7 years imprisonment.  The amounts of other drugs not susceptible to application of 'starting points'.

Details of Mitigation:

Crown: a man of good character: first offender.  Early guilty pleas for Counts 2, 3 and 7: 1/3 discount.  Not guilty to Count 1 maintained until 2 weeks before trial: not entitled to full 1/3 discount.  Guilty pleas to Counts 4 and 6 offered but initially rejected: possibility of Newton hearing.  Accepted on basis that no material difference to sentence.  No mitigation for social supply; Defendant was profiting from his drug dealing.  He had benefit of supporting family and friends and good employment/study record.  Nothing exceptional to justify departure from court's established sentencing policy for supply of drugs.

 

Delay between initial arrest and charge: acknowledged there was delay caused by discovery of messages on third party phone requiring further investigation into finances etc of Defendant etc: interrupted by Covid pandemic.

 

Defence: Emphasised guilty pleas, co-operation, good character, family support, employment record, delay: contended an exceptional case which allowed Court to

impose CSO. References in support provided.

Previous Convictions:

None. 

Conclusions:

Count 1:	9 month's imprisonment.
Count 2:	1 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 3:	6 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	Starting point 7 years' imprisonment.  5 years and 3 months' imprisonment, consecutive.
Count 6:	9 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 7:	1 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total:  6 years' imprisonment. 

Confiscation Order sought in the sum of £4,491

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and the mobile phone sought. 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:	9 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 2:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 3:	6 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	3 years and 9 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 6:	9 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 7:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.

Total:  3 years and 9 months' imprisonment. 

Confiscation Order made in the sum of £4,491

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and the mobile phone ordered. 

J. C. Gollop Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate H. J, Heath for the Defendant

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Jordan Jones you are 24 years old and fall to be sentenced for six offences, including the importation and supply of controlled drugs namely, cannabis resin and MDMA.  On 29^th January 2020, Count 1 in the Indictment, a package addressed to you at an address in St Brelade was seized by a Customs Officers and examined.  The package was posted from Brighton.  Sweets and chocolates within the package included four individually heat sealed and clingfilm wrapped packages containing 186 grams of cannabis resin.

2.        Counts 2, 3 and 7 on the Indictment relate to offences of possession of cannabis resin.  On 2^nd February 2020, Customs Officers executed a search warrant under the Misuse of Drugs Jersey Law 1978 at your home at St Brelade.  Your bedroom was searched, and in it was found cash totalling £4,378 the majority of which, £4,060, was found in a pair of trainers, covered in socks.  The Crown take the view, with which we agree, that you cannot adequately explain that cash and the Crown's expert expressed the view that they were wrapped and bundled in a way typically employed by those supplying drugs and that view was reinforced by examination of your banking records.  The Police recovered just under 10 grams of cannabis from your home and 501 grams of MDMA.

3.        Further, on 9^th January 2021 when you attended the Elizabeth Terminal in order to be charged in relation to the offences you committed in 2020 you, extraordinarily in our view, had cannabis in your possession at 3.7 grams at Count 7 which perhaps is indicative of the routine way in which you treated drugs as part of your life.

4.        Counts 4 and 6 relate to your supply of controlled drugs namely MDMA and cannabis resin between April 2019 and January 2020.  Telephone messages from a telephone seized from a third party in April 2020 indicated that you had been supplying cannabis resin and ecstasy over a period approximately of one year.  As a consequence of the analysis of telephone evidence, you are to be sentenced for supply of 4 grams of MDMA at Count 4 and the supply of 170 grams of cannabis resin at Counts 6. 

5.        The Crown accepts the submission that you made in your basis of plea that these drugs were to be supplied by you to people that you knew.  It is plain from the basis of that plea that supply was to be for money, and you would sell those drugs to your friends, and it is said on your behalf today that you would bulk buy drugs and sell them to your friends, the drugs were sourced locally, and you had paid for them in cash.

6.        The total value of the cannabis seized was between £2,700 and £3,700 and the MDMA had a street value of between £40 and £50.  During interviews you did not admit certain of the offences, but you said you were a heavy smoker of cannabis using 12 to 13 grams per week, for which you would pay £15 per gram.  This would result, if it was true, in you spending approximately £10,000 a year on buying cannabis.

7.        You pleaded guilty to most of the offences on the Indictment at the first opportunity in this Court and you are given full credit for all of your pleas with the exception of your late plea of guilty to Count 1, which you only entered having pleaded not guilty at the pre-trial review, which you maintained at the plea and directions hearing and you changed that plea shortly before that Count was to be tried by the Inferior Number.

8.        The Social Enquiry Report says that you are a social supplier of illegal drugs to people known to you.  But a social supplier on the facts of this case is still a supply for cash, and any sale of drugs for money is a commercial supply in the view of this Court.

9.        You accept that you and others made calculations which allowed you to conclude it was more effective to buy drugs in bulk and distribute them amongst yourselves than to purchase drugs individually.  This included a Class A drug Ecstasy, which as you know has been known to kill people who take it.  That is why it is a Class A drug.

10.      The Crown has taken a starting point of 7 years' imprisonment for the supply of MDMA which is not challenged on your behalf.  We have taken into account your good character, your guilty plea, your youth, your excellent work record, the letters from friends, family, employers, the delay and all that has been said so well on your behalf by Advocate Heath.  But these offences are so serious that only an immediate custodial sentence can be justified and that is the sentence that the Court is imposing today. 

11.      As an act of mercy, and in order to have regard to totality, the offence at Count 1, 9 months' imprisonment, we make concurrent to the other offences.  The offence at Count 2, 1 month imprisonment, concurrent.  Count 3, 6 month's imprisonment concurrent.  Count 4, we give you full credit for a guilty plea and reduce the sentence further on account of the mitigation to which we have referred, to 3 years and 9 months' imprisonment.  Count 6, 9 month's imprisonment.  Count 7, 1 month's imprisonment making a total of 3 years and 9 months' imprisonment.

12.      We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and mobile phone. 

Authorities

Rimmer v AG [2001] JLR 373.

AG v Hall [2021] JRC 082.

Shahnowaz v AG [2007] JLR 221.

Campbell & others v AG [1995] JLR 136.

AG v Mackenzie & others [2011] JRC 173A.

AG v Carroll [2020] JRC 254.

Proceeds of Crime (Jersey) Law 1999.