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 Cholewinski Ciejka Wierzbicki [2023] JRC 046 (20 March 2023)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2023/2023_046.html
Cite as: [2023] JRC 46, [2023] JRC 046
[New search] [Help]
Superior Number Sentencing - drugs - supply - Class A and Class B
|
Before : |
R. J. MacRae, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Ramsden, Christensen, Le Cornu, Cornish, Entwistle |
The Attorney General
-v-
Maciej Cholewinski
Patryk Maciej Ciejka
Mateusz Wierzbicki
Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charges:
Maciej Cholewinski
|
3 counts of: |
Conspiring to commit a statutory offence, contrary to Article 1(1)(b) of the Criminal Offences (Jersey) Law 2009 (Counts 1, 2. 3) |
Age: 32.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
A surveillance operation conducted by the States of Jersey Police, identified CHOLEWINSKI as a supplier of drugs to the local drugs market. The surveillance operation, which in part consisted of authorised covert listening devices deployed onto the vehicles of the Defendants, revealed that CHOLEWINSKI was in regular contact with CIEJKA and WIERZBICKI and that they were discussing the importation of controlled drugs into Jersey, the price the controlled drugs would cost them in Poland and the prices at which controlled drugs could be sold in Jersey.
These conversations between the Defendants were recorded between 24 November 2022 and 2 December 2022. On 24 November 2022, CIEJKA and WIERZBICKI were recorded discussing profits to be made from selling their drugs, their current dealer and recruiting a new dealer. On 30 November 2022, WIERZBICKI was heard on the phone to a legitimate courier company asking about an expected parcel delivery. On 1 December 2022, CIEJKA made a phone call to CHOLEWINSKI from inside his vehicle and were heard discussing the imminent arrival of a parcel.
On 2 December 2022, police officers saw CIEJKA drive his vehicle from his home address to the harbour. Whilst at the terminal CIEJKA made a phone call to CHOLEWINSKI from inside his vehicle. The two discussed the opening the parcel CIEJKA was about to collect. They also discussed a previous importation. CIEJKA then collected a large parcel wrapped in a yellow packaging from a vehicle belongs to a legitimate courier company transporting goods between Poland and Jersey. CIEJKA got back in his vehicle and picked up CHOLEWINSKI. The two were recorded discussing opening the parcel and disposing of the packaging. CHOLEWINSKI says he had customers lined up for later that evening.
Police arrested CIEJKA and CHOLEWINSKI walking with the same parcel. WIERZBICKI was arrested when he arrived at the home address of CHOLEWINSKI a few minutes later.
The contents of the parcel were examined and found to contain 197.1 grams of cocaine (Class A), 18.06 grams of amphetamine (Class B) and 320.65 grams of chloromethcathinone (Class B). The cocaine was analysed and shown to be of 80% purity.
The cocaine, based on purity, would have a street value of £30,000 to £50,000. The chloromethcathinone would have a street value of £19,000 to £25,000 and the amphetamine would have a street value of £900 to £1,000. In total, the collective street value of the drugs seized is between £50,000 to £75,000.
The Defendants initially denied knowledge of the drugs in interview and then made admissions as to their involvement in the importation. CHOLEWINSKI's role was to deal the drugs. He suggested he became involved in drug dealing in May 2022. CIEJKA's role was to send money to Poland for the drugs to be sent to Jersey. WIERZBICKI knew the person in Poland and arranged with this person to source and send the drugs to Jersey. Each Defendant was expecting to make £10,000 from this importation. CIEJKA and WIERZBICKI made admissions to this being the second importation they were involved in.
Details of Mitigation:
Early guilty plea, cooperative in interview, remorse, character references.
Previous Convictions:
14 offences of importation of Class C drugs into Jersey.
Conclusions:
|
Count 1: |
Starting point 13 years' imprisonment. 9 years' imprisonment. |
|
Count 2: |
No separate penalty. |
|
Count 3: |
8 months' imprisonment, concurrent |
Total: 9 years' imprisonment.
Recommendation for deportation sought.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and paraphernalia sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
|
Count 1: |
Starting point 12 years' imprisonment. 7 years and 6 months' imprisonment. |
|
Count 2: |
3 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 3: |
8 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 7 years and 6 months' imprisonment.
Recommendation for deportation ordered.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and paraphernalia ordered.
Patryk Maciej Ciejka
|
3 counts of: |
Conspiring to commit a statutory offence, contrary to Article 1(1)(b) of the Criminal Offences (Jersey) Law 2009 (Counts 1, 2. 3) |
Age: 30.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
See Cholewinski above.
Details of Mitigation:
Early guilty plea, cooperative in interview, no previous convictions, remorse, character references.
Previous Convictions:
None.
Conclusions:
|
Count 1: |
Starting point 13 years' imprisonment. 8 years' imprisonment. |
|
Count 2: |
No separate penalty. |
|
Count 3: |
8 months' imprisonment, concurrent |
Total: 8 years' imprisonment.
No recommendation for deportation sought.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and paraphernalia sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
|
Count 1: |
Starting point 12 years' imprisonment. 7 years' imprisonment. |
|
Count 2: |
3 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 3: |
8 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 7 years' imprisonment.
No recommendation for deportation made.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and paraphernalia ordered.
Mateusz Wierzbicki
|
3 counts of: |
Conspiring to commit a statutory offence, contrary to Article 1(1)(b) of the Criminal Offences (Jersey) Law 2009 (Counts 1, 2. 3) |
Age: 30.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
See Cholewinski above.
Details of Mitigation:
Early guilty plea, cooperative in interview, no previous convictions for drug offences, remorse, character references.
Previous Convictions:
None for drug offences.
Conclusions:
|
Count 1: |
Starting point 13 years' imprisonment. 9 years' imprisonment. |
|
Count 2: |
No separate penalty. |
|
Count 3: |
8 months' imprisonment, concurrent |
Total: 9 years' imprisonment.
Recommendation for deportation sought.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and paraphernalia sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
|
Count 1: |
Starting point 12 years' imprisonment. 7 years and 6 months' imprisonment. |
|
Count 2: |
3 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 3: |
8 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 7 years and 6 months' imprisonment.
Recommendation for deportation ordered.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and paraphernalia ordered.
S. Crowder Esq., Crown Advocate.
Advocate R. C. L. Morley-Kirk for Defendant Cholewinski.
Advocate M. L. Preston for Defendant Ciejka.
Advocate A. E. Binnie for Defendant Wierzbicki.
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. You fall to be sentenced today for your role in the importation of controlled drugs into Jersey and their onward supply. You each played an instrumental role in a conspiracy to import controlled drugs between May and December last year. You are all Polish nationals.
2. Cholewinski, you are 32, Ciejka, you are 30; and Wierzbicki, you are also 30 years old.
3. A Police surveillance operation in late 2022 revealed that you were discussing between yourselves the importation of drugs, cocaine in particular, into Jersey, the price that those drugs would cost in Poland, and the price at which they could be sold here. You arranged for the drugs to be imported into Jersey by parcel. The parcel originated from Poland and came to Jersey by ferry. One such parcel arrived on the evening of 2 December 2022 and was collected by Mr Ciejka from the ferry terminal. It was clear from conversations recorded and subsequently transcribed that you had customers ready and waiting for the cocaine you imported that day. Later that evening as Mr Ciejka and Mr Cholewinski were walking towards the latter's home, they were arrested and the parcel that you had collected shortly before from the ferry terminal was seized by police officers. It contained, among other things, 197.1 grams of cocaine, 18.06 grams of amphetamine and 321 grams of chloromethcathinone which we are told by the Crown is a synthetic psychoactive drug which has a similar effect on a user as cocaine, MDMA or amphetamine. The cocaine was of 80% purity which is high. It had a street value of between £30,000 and £50,000, the amphetamine had a street value of between £900 and £1,000, and the chloromethcathinone had a street value of between £19,000 and £25,000 - giving the three drugs seized a collective street value in Jersey of between £50,000 and £75,000.
4. Mr Cholewinski, your address was searched and the police seized, amongst other things, digital scales, snap seal bags and £1,640 in cash. From Mr Wierzbicki's property, the police also seized digital scales.
5. In interviews, you all made admissions. Mr Cholewinski you made admissions as to your involvement in the importation and your expectation of making profits from the sale of the drugs that you imported and it is clear from the evidence that you were to be the main local dealer or supplier of those drugs.
6. Mr Ciejka, you made admissions that you knew that the package contained drugs, although initially you claimed not to know what the drug was or how much in terms of quantity there was in the package. Subsequently, you admitted that the three of you had agreed to sell drugs in the island and you were to be responsible for remitting some of the proceeds of sale to Poland. You were to give £11,000 to the supplier in Poland. You each planned to make £10,000 in profit from the sale of these drugs. This was, you said Mr Ciejka, your second importation of drugs into Jersey last year. The first importation was in October and the three of you successfully imported 100 grams of amphetamine, and Mr Ciejka you said you received £1,000 from Mr Cholewinski for your role in relation to that separate importation, again collecting the parcel from the harbour and taking it to Mr Cholewinski's home. Those drugs were also sold onto people living in Jersey. You described Mr Cholewinski as the 'boss'.
7. Finally Mr Wierzbicki, you also made admissions in interview, particularly after the tape recordings from the vehicles in which you or your co-defendants travelled were played to you. You agreed you had taken part in the importation with your two co-defendants. You agreed that the supplier in Poland was going to be paid, as we have said, by Mr Ciejka, and that you were each to receive £10,000 from the profits of sale. In respect of the October importation, you gave a different account from one of your co-defendants saying that you had imported 130 grams of 'crystal' and you had received £5,000.
8. You all pleaded guilty at the first opportunity in the Magistrate's Court to the main count on the Indictment, Count 1, and also at the first opportunity to Counts 2 and 3 which were later added by the Crown. The first opportunity to enter pleas in relation to those counts arose when you were indicted. Accordingly by reason of those pleas and your admissions in interview you will each receive full credit for those pleas of guilty.
9. The Crown say that although you, Mr Cholewinski, had responsibility for the receipt and onward distribution of the drugs that you all had agreed to import, you each played a crucial role in the conspiracy. Mr Ciejka was trusted with the funds of the operation and was responsible for paying the Polish source and collecting the parcels for the purpose of delivery to Mr Cholewinski's home. Mr Wierzbicki was instrumental in organising the purchase in the first place, and the importation of the drugs via a reputable courier company. Mr Wierzbicki told Mr Ciejka where to send the funds in Poland as he knew the identity of the source.
10. The Crown say that the starting point in terms of sentence for all three of you should be the same. We agree. The Crown moved for a starting point of 13 years' imprisonment in this case. Having regard to all the circumstances to which we have referred we have decided on balance to accept the submission made by Defence counsel that the starting point on Count 1 should be 12 years' imprisonment. I should tell you that two of the five Jurats would have chosen a higher starting point with a consequential higher ultimate sentence imposed in each of your cases.
11. Mr Cholewinski, you have previous convictions for importing Class C drugs into Jersey; Mr Ciejka, you are a man of previous good character; Mr Wierzbicki, you are not a man of good character, but your previous offences are not for drug related matters.
12. You are all, according to the Probation Service, at moderate risk of re-conviction. We have taken into account the references written on your behalf and all that has been said today on your behalf by counsel.
13. But these were Class A drugs and you were all equally responsible for importing, on a commercial basis, a substantial amount of cocaine into the island which you hoped to sell for a significant profit.
14. We have taken into account your guilty pleas, your remorse, the references (as we have said) and all the mitigation before the Court. The least sentence that we think appropriate to impose upon you in relation to each of you is as follows:
15. Mr Cholewinski, Count 1, 7½ years' imprisonment. Count 2, 3 months' imprisonment, concurrent. Count 3, 8 months' imprisonment, concurrent making a total of 7½ years' imprisonment.
16. Mr Ciejka, Count 1, 7 years' imprisonment. Count 2, 3 months' imprisonment, concurrent. Count 3, 8 months' imprisonment, concurrent making a total of 7 years' imprisonment.
17. Mr Wierzbicki, Count 1, 7½ years' imprisonment. Count 2, 3 months' imprisonment, concurrent. Count 3, 8 months' imprisonment, concurrent making a total of 7½ years' imprisonment.
18. I now turn to the question of deportation. A deportation notice has been served on each of you. We have considered the two-stage test set out in the case of Camacho v AG [2007] JLR 462. The first question is this: is your continued presence detrimental to the island? In view of the gravity of the offences you have committed the Court has no hesitation in answering this question in the affirmative in each of your cases and indeed that has been conceded by counsel in two of the cases.
19. The second matter that the Court needs to consider is to balance the interests of the community in your deportation against the human rights under the European Convention of Human Rights, as incorporated into our domestic law, including the right to family life, of you and members of your family.
20. In the case of you Mr Cholewinski, you have lived in Jersey since 2009, accordingly for 13 years prior to your arrest. You are in a relationship with your partner who is from Thailand and is currently living in Thailand, but during your relationship you have been living in Jersey. You have no children, no accommodation in the island or employment. You do have a brother living in the island to whom you are close and parents living in the Republic of Ireland. We have considered the matter with care and on balance, on the material available to us, we recommend your deportation at the end of your sentence.
21. Mr Ciejka, in 2014 you met your wife in Poland at a charitable event where you were to receive an award as a volunteer firefighter. You moved to Jersey together in 2016 and married in 2019. The balance of your family lives in Poland and Germany. You have generally been in work since you arrived here seven years ago. You have accommodation in the island and your wife has just renewed the lease on the premises in which you lived in for a further three years. Your wife visits you in custody every week and your employer has written to the Court saying that your job is available on your release. You have, as we observed, no previous convictions and our conclusion is on balance that we do not recommend your deportation.
22. Mr Wierzbicki, you came to live in Guernsey in 2016 and left that island in 2020. You had a relationship with a woman in Guernsey which ended in 2020 and she gave birth to your child, a girl, in August 2020. The Pre-Sentence Report says that your relationship with the mother of your child lasted for two years and your daughter was born in August 2020. Paragraph 14 of the Pre-Sentence Report says:
"Having conducted lateral checks with the Guernsey Multi Agency and Safeguarding Hub they confirm that a MASH referral was received due to concerns of him" [that is you] "posing a risk to the unborn child. A pre-birth planning meeting was convened however it was determined that Mr Wierzbicki had relocated to Jersey and no further action was taken and the case was closed. Mr Wierzbicki reported that living with [name of child's mother] had been tense and he decided to leave. Since the birth of his daughter he reported having regular contact by visiting her periodically in Guernsey. He last saw his daughter two months prior to his current remand in custody".
23. Contrary to what is said at paragraph 14 of the Pre-Sentence Report, your advocate today says that in fact you left Guernsey towards the end of 2020 and not before your child was born but in any event you left the island at the most three or four months after she was born and then you resided in Jersey for approximately two years before being arrested and remanded in custody in relation to these offences. In respect of your time in Guernsey it is of note that you committed criminal offences. In 2018 you were sentenced to a period of 9 weeks' imprisonment by the Guernsey Magistrate's Court for public order offences including affray and notwithstanding the fact that you were residing in Jersey from the end of 2020 onwards you also committed another offence in Guernsey in July of last year when you went to Guernsey, it is said to visit your daughter, and you were fined by the Guernsey Magistrate's Court on the first of August 2022 in respect of that additional offence.
24. Your counsel says that a deportation order made in Jersey will exclude you from residing in the other Crown Dependencies and in that regard she has furnished the Court with a file note of a conversation that she had with the Guernsey immigration authorities at the end of last week in which she was told that the Guernsey Border Agency position is that a deportation order made in Jersey will automatically be extended to the other Crown Dependencies as a matter of course. It is a different situation to that on the mainland UK, the note says, and your counsel says that a deportation order made by the Royal Court will not automatically have effect in the UK; it may be reconsidered in terms of its effect in the UK but it will have (in effect) automatic consequence in the other Crown Dependencies. The note goes on to say the Guernsey authorities take the view that the Jersey Court Immigration Authorities and the Lieutenant Governor, now the Minister, will have fully considered the human rights implications of the individual concerned and therefore automatically extend the order. On the assumption that that note is correct we have considered the matter. You are now in a new relationship with a partner who also originates from Poland. You have been seeing her for some 12 to 18 months. She spent some months in Jersey last year and is currently back in the island. She does not have leave to remain but she may acquire such status in due course and she currently spends time in Jersey on a temporary work permit.
25. We have considered with care your human rights and the rights of your daughter and new partner and on balance, having regard to the circumstances that we have considered we do recommend your deportation at the end of your sentence.
26. We order destruction of the drugs and related paraphernalia, not including mobile phones.
27. We adjourn the question of confiscation to 20 April 2023 at 2:30pm with two weeks from today for the Crown to serve its notice under the 1999 Law.
Authorities
Criminal Offences (Jersey) Law 2009
Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Article 5 & Schedule 2)