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 Smallegange [2024] JRC 087 (12 April 2024)
URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2024/2024_087.html
Cite as: [2024] JRC 087, [2024] JRC 87
[New search] [Help]
Inferior Number Sentencing - drugs.
|
Before : |
Sir Timothy Le Cocq, Bailiff, and Jurats Dulake and Hughes |
The Attorney General
-v-
Evert Paul Smallegange
Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charge:
|
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). |
Age: 58.
Plea: Guilty
Details of Offence:
On 5 February 2024, the Defendant arrived at Jersey Airport having arrived from London Gatwick having flown into Gatwick earlier that day from Malaga, Spain. He was stopped and arrested by a Customs Officer outside Jersey Airport on suspicion of being concerned in the importation of a controlled drug. The Defendant's phone, €145 in cash, handbag and suitcase were seized.
During a search, the Officer asked the Defendant whether he had any controlled drugs internally. The Defendant admitted that he had swallowed cannabis. Between 5 February 2024 and 9 February 2024, the Defendant passed 199 pellets. The pellets were analysed and confirmed to be 998.98 grams of cannabis resin. Each pellet contained an average of 5.02 grams of cannabis resin. It is estimated that 998.98 grams of cannabis would have a street value in Jersey of between £20,000 and £30,000 (a gram of cannabis being worth between £20-£30).
The Defendant's mobile phone contained numerous messages with his associate in Spain regarding the importation of the cannabis, including messages regarding what story the Defendant would give if he was stopped.
Details of Mitigation:
Guilty plea and co-operation in police interview. Defendant had provided an Article 9 statement in connection with the ongoing investigation in relation to the importation and that fact was referred to in open Court.
Previous Convictions:
He has four previous convictions for drug offences, all from the Netherlands.
Conclusions:
|
Count 1: |
Starting point of 2 years' imprisonment. 12 months' imprisonment. |
Total: 12 months' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.
The Crown invites the Court to order the forfeiture of the Defendant's mobile phone and the 145 euros in cash seized on his arrest.
No costs order sought.
Recommendation for deportation sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
|
Count 1: |
Starting point of 2 years' imprisonment. 10 months' imprisonment |
Total: 10 months' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.
Forfeiture of mobile phone ordered, subject to defence providing a list of documents on the phone that the Defendant can have copies of prior to forfeiture.
Court does not order the forfeiture of the 145 euros.
Recommendation for deportation made.
No prosecution costs ordered.
Crown Advocate L. Taylor.
Advocate L. J. Glynn for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE BAILIFF:
1. You are to be sentenced today with regard to one count of importing just under a kilogram of cannabis. You concealed the drugs internally having swallowed 199 pellets which are worth approximately £30,000.
2. You were searched on your arrival in Jersey on 5 February this year by a Customs officer and when you were searched in the Customs Custody Suite you told the officer that you had swallowed cannabis. Following this disclosure, you were monitored whilst you passed the internal packages containing the drug. The pellets were analysed and confirmed to contain a total of 998.98 grams of cannabis resin, each pellet containing an average of 5.02 grams, the street value as we have indicated in part is between £20,000 and £30,000.
3. In interview you confirmed that you were going to be paid 750 euros by individuals who lived in Spain to bring the cannabis into Jersey, a place you had never visited before. This was to be the first of regular visits for that purpose. You had agreed to the arrangement because you were many thousands of pounds in debt due to illness. The flights had been paid for by individuals in Spain at whose instigation you were importing the drugs into Jersey. Your mobile phone has been downloaded and examined and it contained numerous messages with associates in Spain concerning the importation of cannabis.
4. The guideline case of Campbell v Attorney General [1994] JLR 136 has as expected been placed before us in which the Court of Appeal laid down sentencing guidelines concerning the trafficking of Class B drugs, they indicate a starting point of 2 - 6 years' imprisonment for trafficking quantities between 1 and 10 kilograms. The position of a Defendant between those bands is determined by reference to the weight of the drugs and the role with some reference paid also to the value. We note that although the amount that you imported is marginally under the lower limit of 1kilogram in the Campbell case. The Crown has approached this on the basis that it is in effect a kilogram of cannabis. We think that in the circumstances that is the right approach, and we agree with the Crown's approach in that regard.
5. It is clear that your involvement in this matter is that of a courier and you were undertaking this transaction for money, your associates having provided for travel and accommodation as we have said. In the light of these circumstances, we agree with the Crown that the correct starting point is one of 2 years' imprisonment.
6. We note that you have a number of previous convictions including for drug related offences and therefore you do not have the benefit of mitigation for good character. We note the contents of the Pre-Sentence Report which place you at a high risk of reconviction in the next 12 months, but we also note that you are cooperating and engaging with support offered whilst you are in prison. You accept responsibility for your offending. You have the benefit of an early guilty plea, however in the light of the evidence as the court has remarked on a number of similar occasions a conviction was almost inevitable. You were however very candid with your response to Customs and were to an extent cooperative. In the circumstances we are prepared to give full credit for the guilty plea.
7. We note the other mitigation available to you. In particular we note the contents of the Pre-Sentencing Report, and we note your remorse set out in your letter, and we take your remorse to be entirely genuine in the circumstances. The most important part of the mitigation, however, is the cooperation that you have provided with the investigatory authorities. You have made an Article 9 statement confirming your willingness to give evidence in any future prosecution, and in it providing information to the prosecution and investigatory authorities. As the court has said on a number of occasions this is important mitigation and it is to be encouraged and it is encouraged by the reward of a significant deduction from what would otherwise be the sentence of imprisonment.
8. In all the circumstances from a starting point of two years' imprisonment, you are sentenced to 10 months' imprisonment.
9. We also order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.
10. On the matter of the mobile phone, we accept that you should have the opportunity of downloading your creative work in terms of writings before the phone is destroyed, the destruction of which we do hereby order on the completion of that exercise. The downloading must be at your expense and in cooperation with prosecution authorities, but we do not order the forfeiture of the money seized from you.
11. Turning to the question of deportation we think the matter is applying the test in Camacho v Attorney General [2007] JLR 462 entirely clear and we recommend your deportation from the Island on the completion of your sentence.
Authorities
Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law 1999.
Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978.
Criminal Justice (Forfeiture Orders) (Jersey) Law 2001.
Immigration (Jersey) Order 2021.
AG v Carragher [2020] JRC 156.