Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2006]JRC067

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

28^th April, 2006

Before     :

M. C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats de Veulle and Allo.

The Attorney General

-v-

Sean O'Connor

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, on guilty pleas to:

2 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug contrary to Article 8(1) and Article 8(2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978.  (Counts 1 and 2).
1 count of:	Supplying a controlled drug contrary to Article 5(b) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978.

Age:  22 (21 at the time of the offence).

Plea: Count 1 (simple possession of ecstasy) having fallen away).

Count 2, Guilty (entered at late stage).

Count 3, Guilty.

Details of Offence:

At approximately 1 a.m. on 12th November, 2005, the Manager of Mint Nightclub witnessed O'Connor carrying out what appeared to be a drug deal within the nightclub.  O'Connor was subsequently arrested and found to be in possession of 36 complete and 2 half tablets of ecstasy, £901.00 in cash and a list detailing five names and numbers.

In police interview O'Connor admitted to having purchased 50 tablets earlier that night, to having then taken 4 or 5 himself and to having given 4 to a friend who "was stuck".  In the opinion of the police expert, the ecstasy recovered had a street value of £370.00 and was of a commercial quantity.

When charged, O'Connor entered guilty pleas to possession and to supply of ecstasy but a not guilty plea to possession with intent to supply.  Shortly before the Pre-trial Review was to take place O'Connor indicated that he would plead guilty to possession with intent to supply but the matter had to be set down for a Newton Hearing as the Crown did not accept his version of events (i.e. that he would only have supplied the drugs on a "social" basis).

In the week prior to the date of the Newton, O'Connor advised that he no longer intended to maintain his version of events and the matter proceeded to sentencing.

Details of Mitigation:

O'Connor's mother had died suddenly when O'Conner was only thirteen years' old and it transpired that he had never really come to terms with his loss.  He had turned to alcohol and drugs in order to try to cope.  O'Connor was remorseful and produced a bundle of references confirming, inter alia, that he had gainful employment and that he is due to qualify as an electrician in July 2006.

Previous Convictions:

Four  convictions for 6 relatively minor offences  (all at Youth court level and none for drugs).

Conclusions:

Crown moved for a starting pint of 7 years' imprisonment. Observed that it would ordinarily move for custodial sentences of 3 years' imprisonment (Count 2) and 12 months' imprisonment, concurrent (Count 3).  In light of O'Connor's particular circumstances (youth, bereavement issues,  remorse, positive references, employment/qualification opportunities) and the recommendations of Probation (a "robustly" supervised 18 month Probation Order), the Crown felt that this case was sufficiently exceptional to warrant a non-custodial sentence of 18 months' Probation Order with 240 hours' Community Service Order for Count 2, and 18 months' Probation Order, concurrent for Count 3.

A confiscation order in the sum of £901.00 was requested, as was forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Starting point 7 years' imprisonment.   Count confirmed that a custodial sentence of three years for Count 2 and twelve months' concurrent for Count 3 would ordinarily have been appropriate.  However, in light of O'Connor's particular, exceptional circumstances, granted the Crown's conclusions.

A Confiscation Order in the sum of £901 was made, as requested.

The forfeiture and destruction of the drugs was also ordered.

A. R. Binnington, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate S. E. Fitz for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You were clearly willing to sell a number of ecstasy tablets that you had bought.  Such conduct almost always attracts a prison sentence in this Island.  You can consider yourself extremely fortunate that in this case there is particularly powerful mitigation.  We have read the reports and we hope that you have learned your lesson and that we will not see you here again.

2.        In these circumstances we are going to take an exceptional course and not impose a prison sentence.  We are going to impose the sentence recommended by the Crown which is, on Count 2, you will be sentenced to 240 hours' Community Service and a Probation Order for 18 months; and on count 3, concurrent, a Probation Order for 18 months. 

3.        I wish to make it absolutely clear to you that you must stick by what the Court has imposed.  In other words you must turn up when called on to do the community service.  You must do it properly.  Whenever your Probation Officer tells you what to do, you have to do it.  If you re-offend or if you do not comply with what your Probation Officer tells you, or do not do the Community Service, you will be brought back here and you will inevitably go to prison.  We say we would have had in mind the sentence recommended by the Crown Advocate, namely 3 years' imprisonment.  We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

No Authorities