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 Cauvain [2023] JRC 168 (18 September 2023)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2023/2023_168.html
Cite as: [2023] JRC 168
[New search] [Help]
Superior Number Sentencing - drugs - supply - Class A and Class B
|
Before : |
R. J. MacRae, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Ronge, Christensen MBE, Le Heuzé, Opfermann and Berry |
The Attorney General
-v-
Joshua James Cauvain
Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 14 September, 2023, following a guilty plea 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) |
|
1 count of: |
Being concerned in the supplying of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(c) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 3) |
Age: 21.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
Police officers executed a search warrant at the Defendant's home address. In the lounge, within a wardrobe, officers located a rucksack holding a number of freezer bags containing suspected MDMA tablets. In total, 425 MDMA tablets and almost 15 grams of partial MDMA tablets (Count 1) as well as 1,081 amphetamine tablets (Count 2) were recovered. The total street value of the drugs seized was between £30,100 and £45,250.
The Defendant was arrested on the same day. In interview he accepted holding the rucksack which he believed contained MDMA. He stated that he was holding the drugs for another whom he would not name. He denied counting the tablets, taking any out, handling or packaging the drugs.
A subsequent analysis of the defendant's mobile telephone revealed that he had been concerned in the supply of 400 MDMA tablets (Count 3). Forensic examinations of the freezer bags located fingerprints matching those of the defendant.
By committing these offences the defendant was in breach of a Community Service Order imposed by the Royal Court in December 2021 for possession with intent to supply MDMA.
Details of Mitigation:
Guilty plea. Youth - defendant was a young offender at the time of the commission of the offences.
Previous Convictions:
Two previous convictions for possession of MDMA with intent to supply (for which he was in breach of CSO by reoffending) and convictions for malicious damage and larceny.
Conclusions:
|
Count 1: |
Starting point 11 years' imprisonment. 7 years' imprisonment. |
|
Count 2: |
Starting point 5 years' imprisonment. 3 years and 2 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 3: |
Starting point 11 years' imprisonment. 7 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Breach of Community Service Order: revoke Community Service Order and impose 1 years' imprisonment, consecutive to Count 1.
Total: 8 years' imprisonment.
Declaration of benefit sought in the sum of £38,000.
Confiscation order sought in the sum of £1.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
|
Count 1: |
Starting point 10 years' imprisonment. 5 years' imprisonment. |
|
Count 2: |
Starting point 5 years' imprisonment. 2 years and 6 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
|
Count 3: |
Starting point 10 years' imprisonment. 5 years' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Breach of Community Service Order: Court revoked Community Service Order and imposed 1 years' imprisonment, consecutive to Count 1.
Total: 6 years' imprisonment.
Declaration of benefit made in the sum of £38,000.
Confiscation order made in the sum of £1.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs ordered.
Ms C. L. G. Carvalho, Crown Advocate.
Advocate C. Baglin for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. Joshua James Cauvain, you are 21 years old and have two previous convictions for possession with intent to supply MDMA for which you were sentenced by this Court in December 2021 to a Probation Order for 2 years and a Community Service Order of 480 hours (AG v Cauvain [2021] JRC 306). That was an exceptional sentence. You received the maximum Community Service Order that can be imposed under law, equivalent to a sentence of 3 years and 2 months youth detention, from a starting point of 8 years imprisonment for the main offence and that was because of your age, your early guilty plea, your good character and the recommendations of the Probation Report.
2. On that occasion, in the last sentence of the Court's judgment, the presiding judge expressed the Court's wish that you would never be seen in Court again.
3. Unfortunately that did not occur, and notwithstanding the chance that you were given by this Court at the end of 2021, you fall to be sentenced today for possession with intent to supply MDMA, 425 whole tablets and 15 grams of broken tablets, possession with intent to supply amphetamine - 1,081 tablets, and being concerned in the supply of an additional 400 MDMA tablets.
4. You are also by virtue of your offending in breach of the Community Service and Probation Orders to which we have just referred.
5. The drugs in question were found at your home (that is the drugs at Counts 1 and 2) when a search warrant was executed on 30 June 2023. The total value of the drugs seized was between £30,000 and £45,000 and mobile telephone analysis indicated that you were supplying MDMA on an active basis to two other persons.
6. In interview with the police you said that you were holding the drugs at Counts 1 and 2 for another and you would have received a payment of £1,000 you say today, and £2,000 you told the police, as compensation for doing so, so it was plainly a commercial element to this transaction which you freely agreed to. In respect of the supplies of MDMA at Count 3 you say you were delivering drugs as directed by the person who placed them in your charge. In respect of the Community Service Order made in 2021, you have completed 285 hours or just under 60% of the order - 195 hours are outstanding which is itself is the equivalent to a custodial term of 15 months and 2 weeks.
7. You pleaded guilty to the three offences to which we have referred at the first opportunity and you will receive full credit for those pleas.
8. The Crown, in its conclusions, identified the starting point on Counts 1 and 3 as 10 years imprisonment. The Crown argue that this starting point should be increased by reference to the substantial quantity of amphetamine, covered by Count 2 of the Indictment, which standing alone would warrant a starting point of 5 years' imprisonment.
9. Accordingly the Crown propose increasing the starting point at Counts 1 and 3 to 11 years imprisonment under the principles in the case of Valler v AG [2002] JLR 383, which applies where at least two types of drug reflected by separate counts on the Indictment are present in significant quantities.
10. We have accepted the argument advanced on your behalf by your counsel that, having regard to the total number of MDMA tablets in this case, that the correct starting points on Counts 1 and 3 is 9 years' imprisonment subject to a one year uplift - leaving a starting point of 10 years concurrent on Counts 1 and 3 respectively.
11. Although you are 21 years old, you committed these offences and were convicted by your plea of guilty when you were 20 years old. Accordingly, Article 4 of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014 is engaged. Nonetheless, we are satisfied that these offences are so serious that a non-custodial sentence cannot be justified and further that you have a history of failing to respond to non-custodial sentences in view of your breach of the orders made by this Court in December 2021. Nonetheless as required by that Law, we do take into account your youth in addition to your guilty plea.
12. You are assessed by the Probation Service as being at high risk of re-conviction.
13. We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs recovered.
14. We certify your benefit in the sum of £38,100 and make a Confiscation Order in the nominal sum of £1.
15. We have listened with care to what has been said on behalf of your by your advocate today and read all that is said about you particularly in the Probation Report. We note that you are in many respects a hardworking young man, that you are not addicted to drink or drugs and we have decided to reduce the Crown's conclusions - principally because of your youth.
16. Nonetheless to act as a minder or warehouseman for another in respect of Class A drugs is an extremely serious offence. Your advocate described your role as being a key one in the chain of supply which it is.
17. Two of the Jurats would have imposed a sentence one year longer than the sentence that the majority have decided to impose as follows, and this is the sentence of the Court.
(i) On Count 1, from a starting point of 10 years' imprisonment, the sentence is 5 years imprisonment.
(ii) On Count 2, from a starting point 5 years' imprisonment, the sentence is 2½ years' imprisonment.
(iii) On Count 3, the starting point is 10 years' imprisonment and the sentence is 5 years' imprisonment,
making a total in relation to those offences of 5 years' imprisonment, concurrent.
18. We revoke the Community Service Order and impose a consecutive sentence of 1 year making a total of 6 years imprisonment.
Authorities
Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 2014.
Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978
Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 1994
Criminal Justice (Community Service Orders) (Jersey) Law 2001
McDonough v AG [1994] JCA 193.
AG v Nafkha 2000/86
AG v Antunes & Ors [2003] JRC 072.
AG v Gill [2018] JRC 196.