[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Jersey Unreported Judgments
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> 1998/170 - AG v Durkin [1998] UR 170 (7 August 1998) URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/1998/170.html Cite as: [1998] UR 170

[New search] [Contents list] [Help]

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

7 August 1998

Before: F C Hamon Esq Deputy Bailiff and

Jurats Potter and Le Brocq

AG -v- Karen Irene Durkin

3 counts of: possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 6(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978.

Count 1: diamorphine (47 mg.).

Count 2: cannabis resin (19.58 grams).

Count 3: amphetamine sulphate (473 mg.).

Age: 39

Plea: Guilty

Details of Offence:

Following execution of drugs search warrant at Durkin’s home address, Durkin was searched and the following drugs were recovered from her bra:

1. Heroin 47 milligrams (30% by weight diamorphine - value £30).

2. Cannabis resin 19.58 grams (value £110.43).

3. Amphetamine Sulphate 473 milligrams (5% by weight amphetamine sulphate - value £10.00).

Details of Mitigation:

Immediate admission that cannabis resin belonged to her. Denied any knowledge of heroin and amphetamine sulphate, but eventual and inevitable guilty plea. Told probation officer that:

(a) the heroin was her stepson’s and that she was withholding it from him in order to control the amount he took (See SSS Laurence Anthony Durkin, 7^th August, 1998];

(b) the cannabis resin would normally be taken to friends’ houses to smoke after a meal although on this occasion the cannabis was mainly for her husband’s use although she accepted that she would have smoked some;

(c) the amphetamine sulphate was given to her by an unnamed friend for the purposes of providing her with energy. (Durkin suffered from depression from early 1997 until May, 1998).

Reference in probation report to seven bereavements involving family, friends, acquaintances during an 18 month period commencing October, 1995.

Previous Convictions: None.

Conclusions:

Count 1: 1 year’s Probation, with 90 hours’ Community Service.

Count 2: 1 year’s Binding Over Order.

Count 3: 1 year’s Binding Over Order.

Probation report indicated that Durkin was not suitable for probation supervision although suitable for community service, hence binding over orders moved for by Crown.

Sentence & Observations of Court:

2 years’ Probation with 90 hours’ Community Service, to be completed in the first year.

A.G. -v- Buesnel entitled Court to impose non-custodial sentence in view of fact of small amount of drug and first offender. Binding over not sufficient for possession of Class B drugs.

Matthews Esq Crown Advocate

Advocate S Gould for the Accused

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: Because of the decision in Attorney General -v- Buesnel (1996) JLR 265, we are able to look at this particular drug offending from an individualised viewpoint.

No mention, of course, is ever made of where drug users obtain their supplies, but that perhaps is not for us today. The mixture of drugs, albeit of a small and personal amount, in this case, however, has troubled us.

We certainly do not feel that a binding over order is appropriate in this case, but in the circumstances we are going to impose a 2 year Probation Order on these three counts, with 90 hours’ Community Service to be performed in the first year.

Authorities

A.G -v- Buesnel (21^st August, 1996) Jersey Unreported; (1996) JLR 265.