Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2003]JRC083B

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

16^th May 2003

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Fiona Christine Godfrey

 

 

1 count of:	Possession of a controlled drug contrary to Article 6(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978. Count 1: diamorphine.
1 count of:	Being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law 1999: Count 2: diamorphine.

 

 

Age:     28

 

Plea:    Guilty.

 

Details of Offence:

A warrant was executed at the defendant's home address in December, 2002.  Two wraps of heroin (460 milligrams) were found.  The defendant admitted that both were hers but said that she no longer used drugs and had forgotten about them.  She was charged and released on bail following a guilty plea.  In February, 2003, whilst on bail for the aforesaid offence, the defendant flew into Jersey from the UK with heroin concealed internally.  She was stopped by Customs and was initially uncooperative.  However, a medical examination revealed 6.81 grams heroin hidden in the defendant's vagina.  During subsequent interview Godfrey admitted importing the heroin but stated that it was for her own personal use.  She stated that she was an addict and that this amount would last a week or so.  She said she had bought the drugs in Nottingham for £200.00.  The heroin seized had a street value in Jersey of between £2,043.00 and £3,064.00 and a wholesale value of between £1,062.00 and £1,362.00.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea, albeit unavoidable.  Full co-operation with police once drugs discovered.  No previous convictions, remorse and efforts to rehabilitate.

 

Previous Convictions:

None.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	3 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	2 years' imprisonment, concurrent. (Starting point: 6 years' imprisonment).

 

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

In light of the mitigation the Court felt able to pass a non-custodial sentence (mercy).  Twelve month Probation Order coupled with a Treatment Order, and 180 hours community service.  The Court indicated that had it sentenced Godfrey to imprisonment, the period would have been 18 months, as the Court felt that the Crown's starting point was a little high, the facts of Godfrey's case being less serious that those in Gregory.

 

 

 

C.M.M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate M. Renouf for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You have spent several months in prison on remand and it is clear to us that this has caused you to rethink your life.  As you put it in one of the letters we have just read it was a "wake up call".

2.        It has meant being separated from your children who need you desperately, and all the reports make it clear to us that you are strongly motivated now to overcome your addiction.  We very much take that into account and we hope that you mean it.

3.        We take into account that you have no previous convictions, and that you have pleaded guilty.  We also have regard to all the material which appears from the papers before us this morning, and the impressive letters which have been handed up showing the support that you can expect from your family.  You should thank them for it. 

4.        So in all the circumstances we are going to give you a chance.  We are not going to send you to prison even though this is an offence which very often does lead to prison.  We are going to place you on probation for 12 months.  That means you must do as the Probation Officer directs and you must attend meetings with him or her in order to address your problems.  There will also be a condition that you attend the Drug and Alcohol Service for 6 months to comply with treatment as they direct, and you must undertake random urine tests because it is a condition that you remain free from heroin or other opiate drugs. 

5.        In addition, because you must be punished, we are going to impose a community service order of 180 hours.  That means you will have to carry out 180 hours free work for the benefit of the community within the 12 months that lie ahead.  We state that, had we imposed a prison sentence, it would have been one of 18 months.  We think that the starting point of 6 years was a little too high.  The case of Gregory -v- A.G. (1997) JLR 1, was more serious than this one, and all the mitigation would enable us to reduce it to 18 months.  Let me warn you: if you do not do what the Probation Officer says, or if you do not attend the Drug and Alcohol Service, or if you start taking heroin again, or if you do not do your community service then in any of those circumstances you will be brought back here.  You will then be punished for the offence and that will mean you will go to prison, regardless of your little ones who need you.   This is your chance, it is up to you, and we hope very much that you will not breach any of our Orders and that you will repay the faith the Court is putting in you.  We order the destruction and forfeiture of the drugs.

Authorities

Gregory -v- A.G. (1997) JLR 1.

A.G. -v- Buesnell (1996) JLR 265.