Jersey Unreported Judgments

Drugs - application to adjourn sentencing.

[2023]JRC093

Royal Court

(Samedi)

12 June 2023

The Attorney General

-v-

Shane Derek Lloyd

Ms C. L. G. Carvalho, Crown Advocate.

Advocate A. E. Binnie for the Defendant.

EXTEMPORE JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        In this case the Defendant stands before the Royal Court on Indictment in relation to two offences of possession with intent to supply controlled drugs, namely cocaine at Count 1 and cannabis at Count 2.  The offences are alleged to have taken place on 10 March 2023 when the Defendant's home address was searched and various drugs and associated paraphernalia were found.  The Defendant was interviewed the same day and at that stage refused to give access to his iPhone.  A number of devices were seized from him. 

2.        The Defendant, to his credit, pleaded guilty to these two offences on 6 April 2023 and was remanded in custody to be sentenced by the Superior Number on 21 June 2023 and today, pursuant to the provisions of the Criminal Procedure (Jersey) Law 2018 the Indictment has been read.

3.        The reason for the application today is that the Crown invites the Court to order that the sentencing hearing on 21 June should be adjourned to 24 July owing to the fact that certain enquiries are incomplete.  They are incomplete because a number of devices capable of containing information were seized, most of which have been analysed and downloaded and one or two contain material which may give rise to further offences involving the supply of controlled drugs, including the supply of cocaine and cannabis to persons in custody.

4.        Although the successful download of the material held on the principal phone took place shortly after the Defendant was arrested and was disclosed to the Defence on 10^th May 2023, the police expert who needs to interpret the data that has been downloaded in order for charges to be proffered has for a variety of reasons been unable to yet complete that report.  The Crown invite the Court to order that he should do so for the report to be served by 5pm on 23 June 2023, the Crown to have until 30 June to proffer new charges which the Defendant would face in order to enter his pleas on the 14 July 2023.

5.        Advocate Binnie on behalf of the Defendant objects to this new timetable on the grounds that it would be unfair for the Defendant who was expecting to be sentenced on 21 June.  She says the Crown have had plenty of time to put their house in order and the Defendant wishes to start his sentence as soon as possible and the delay is unjustified. 

6.        Certainly if the delay was longer or there was any real evidence of tardiness on the part of the Crown then we would be disposed to decline this application, but in view of the fact that only a period of three months or so has elapsed since these offence have been committed and the proposed timetable is an onerous one for the Crown to comply with in the respect that we are only proposing to allow the Crown short periods to serve the report, proffer new charges and for the Defendant to be indicted in relation to them, and in view of the fact that the prosed delay of 24 July is not, in the circumstances in particular in view of the serious offences to which the Defendant has already pleaded guilty, not disproportionate we have on balance decided that it is in the interests of justice to allow the Crown's application.

7.        We vacate the hearing on 21 June, refix sentence for 24 July and make the orders to which we have referred requiring the Crown to file the expert report on 23 June by 5pm, to proffer new charges by 5pm on 30 June and for the Defendant's case to be listed for plea in relation to those charges before the Samedi Court on Friday 14 July. 

8.        We should add that any application to extend any of those dates should be made by the Crown before they expire.  Any applications to extend those dates after they expire will not be entertained and it is unlikely that any applications to extend those dates will be granted.

9.        The Court has also taken into account the fact that it would be unfortunate if the Defendant were to be sentenced on 21 June and thereafter the Crown were to proffer new charges which would result in the Defendant being sentenced twice, probably by different Jurats, in relation to offences which arose from effectively the same set of circumstances and for that reason too we think it is in the interests of justice to proceed in the way that we have said.  We reassure the Defendant as we have said to his counsel today that he will receive full credit for his pleas of guilty that he entered before the Magistrate.

Authorities

Criminal Procedure (Jersey) Law 2018.