Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2010]JRC073

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

9^th April 2010

Before     :

W. J. Bailhache, Q. C., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Le Breton and Le Cornu.

The Attorney General

-v-

B

C

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

B

1 count of:	Larceny (Count 1).
1 count of:	Breaking and entry and larceny (Count 2).
1 count of:	Violently resisting a police officer in the execution of his duty (Count 3).

Age:  16.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

B stole a toolbox and its contents from the back of a van.  The owner gave chase and B dropped the toolbox and ran away.  He was identified as the thief and his fingerprints were subsequently found on the toolbox (Count 1). 

Occupants of a flat were disturbed at 0200 hours and the female occupant woke to a sound which she described as someone wearing a waterproof type jacket.  She saw a male person standing in the bedroom doorway.  She screamed which woke her partner up who chased the intruder from the house.  The occupants had inadvertently left the front door unlocked.  £250 in cash was stolen together with a camera, mobile phone, lighter and three bags of tobacco (Count 2).  The police attended and found the two defendants in the vicinity.  When they were approached, B, who was recognised by the police, ran off.  C was arrested. 

A search of the vicinity in which the two males had been seen was undertaken and all of the stolen property, save for the cash, was recovered.  The items were found in a granite planter.  CCTV was available and supportive of the charges against the defendants. 

C violently resisted arrest (Count 5).  In interview he denied any involvement in the break-in but through counsel, admitted receiving the stolen property, save for the money.  The property was in his possession for a relatively short period of time (Count 4). 

Police Officers attended at B's home address the following day and he was seen to run away.  He was chased and arrested.  He violently resisted that arrest.  A struggle ensued and he attempted to kick and bite the officers (Count 3).  He was found in possession of £245 which notes matched the denomination of the monies stolen. 

The Crown concluded that the imposition of an immediate sentence by way of youth detention was appropriate for both of the defendants.

B was in breach of a Youth Court Community Service Order previously imposed.  He had 20 hours outstanding. 

C was in breach of a Royal Court Community Service Order (see AG-v-A, B, C, D, E, F and G [2009] JRC 107).  He had completed 150 hours and had also completed the Probation Order. 

C's mother was summoned to Court to answer in relation to the breach of security which the Court imposed on the previous appearance. 

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown

Aged only 16, guilty pleas entered when matter was still before the Youth Court.  Not co-operative in interview.  Not of good character.  Matters of personal mitigation revealed in the reports.  Medium risk of re-offending.  Some improvement noted in attitude/conduct whilst on remand. 

Defence

Claimed a guilty plea was a valuable one.  Offences were opportunistic.  Burglary committed whilst under the influence of alcohol.  Request to be given another chance by way of a non-custodial sentence given his young age. 

Previous Convictions:

4 convictions for 27 offences including breaking and entry, larceny, assault, public order and motoring offences. 

Conclusions:

Count 1:	1 month's youth detention.
Count 2:	18 months' youth detention concurrent, but remitted to 12 month's youth detention, pursuant to Article 4(5) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994
Count 3:	1 month's youth detention, concurrent.

Breach of Community Service Order: 1 week's youth detention, concurrent.

Total:  12 months' youth detention.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

B to be sentenced for a larceny of a toolbox and breaking and entry and larceny.  Also falls to be sentenced for a breach of previous order.  Breaking and entering into domestic properties were extremely worrying for occupants and effectively stops people relaxing within their own property.  His conduct had severely adversely affected the victims.  Extracts from the victim personal statement were read.  He stated that he was ashamed of his behaviour and sorry.  The Court took into account the contents of the reports, letters, guilty plea and youth.  However, the Court had concluded that he fell within Article 4(2)(a) and (c).  The Court considered the imposition of a non-custodial sentence could not be justified.  The Court stated that he must serve a youth detention sentence but he would get assistance.  The Court directed that his time spent on remand at Greenfield's would count towards this sentence.  The Court was going to draw a line so that once he had served sentence he could start afresh.  Recommended he should consider his mother's offer to move to the UK and live with her. 

Conclusions granted.

Existing Community Service Order imposed by the Youth Court on 22^nd September, 2009, discharged.

The Court made the point that but for his age he would have received a substantially higher sentence on the breaking and entry offence.  The sentence has been reduced because of his age. 

C

1 count of:	Receiving stolen property (Count 4).
1 count of:	Violently resisting a police officer in the execution of his duty (Count 5).

Age:  16.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See B above.

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown (Age 15 at the time of the offences)

Guilty plea.  Not co-operative but through Counsel made admissions giving rise to the receiving offence.  Did not have the benefit of good character.  Matters of personal mitigation revealed in reports.  Noted also in breach of curfew.

Defence

Contended that matters could be dealt with by way of a non-custodial sentence.  No history of breaching or failing to comply with non-custodial sentences.  Substantially completed previous Community Service Order and completed probation.  He did not know that B was going to commit the breaking and entry offence.  He had property in his possession for a brief period. 

Note Court also heard from Mrs C in response to her breach of the security of £500 previously ordered.  A single parent, limited income and that her son had not been in trouble for 6 months.  The recent offending was a one-off.  He breached curfew because he was scared of going to prison.  Mixing with the wrong crowd. 

Previous Convictions:

2 convictions for 6 offences including shop lifting, affray and public order.

Conclusions:

Count 4	9 month's youth detention.
Count 5:	1 month's youth detention, concurrent.

Breach of Community Service Order: 6 months' youth detention, consecutive, but remitted to 3 months' youth detention under Article 4(5) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994.

Total:  12 months' youth detention.

It transpired during hearing that incorrect information provided as to outstanding hours under the earlier Community Service Order.  Conclusions were based upon 120 hours being outstanding when in fact only 20 hours were outstanding.  20 hours would equate to 1 week's youth detention. 

Security for good behaviour: Mrs C to pay £500.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

C was sentenced for one count of receiving stolen property and one count of violently resisting arrest together with a breach of Community Service Order.  The Court noted that the affray was a serious offence in relation to the breach matter.  Receiving the stolen property was, however, considered at the low end.  Also considered the violently resisting at the lower end as no blows struck to the Police Officers.  The Court had regard to the provisions of Article 14.  The Court, last May, had thought that custody could be avoided.  The Court felt it was right to find an alternative to custody. 

Count 4	120 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 6 months' youth detention.
Count 5:	6 months' Probation Order.

Breach of Community Service Order: Continue previous Order, 20 hours remaining.

Total:  140 hours' Community Service Order, plus a 6 month Probation Order.

Security for good behaviour order:  Mrs C to pay £250 with 3 months to pay.

Order balance of £250 security to stand for the next 6 months. 

The surety of £500 ordered from Mrs C was partly as a direction to keep her son in order and partly towards him to respect his mother's direction.  The Court felt that he had let his mother down.  The Court reduced the security to £250 and ordered that it be paid within 3 months with the balance of £250 remaining as security for a further 6 months.  If C re-offends then she will be liable to pay that.  This decision was by a majority.  The Court expressed the wish that C should get a job and repay his mother as he had let her down.  The Court did not expect him to let his mother down again. 

J. C. Gollop, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate P. S. Landick for B.

Advocate D. P. Le Maistre for C.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        B you fall to be sentenced for larceny, breaking and entering and larceny and violently resisting arrest, and, as a result of those offences, the breach of the Community Service Order which has been carried forward, where you have some hours left to serve.  In relation to those offences the most serious is the breaking and entering and larceny.  Breaking into domestic premises at night is extremely worrying for anybody, it affects their ability to relax in their own home, and when you look as the Court has, at the victim personal statement, you can see how your conduct seriously affected the victims here.  I'm just going to read that to you again: "On Wednesday 2nd December 2009, when we were broken into, the police were around until about 04.00hrs in the morning and then the Scenes of Crime officer arrived at about 08.00hrs or 09.00hrs. I had not slept at all.  The police had told me that one had been arrested and another had got away.  There was no way that I could have slept knowing that one of them was still out there.  I felt violated because they had been through my handbag and he had come into the bedroom and was looking at us while we were asleep.  When I woke up I panicked.  I have never been that scared in my life.  It was horrible.  I just screamed."  When you hear that again you realise do you not, what effect your conduct had. 

2.        The Court, of course, takes into account everything that your Counsel has said on your behalf and we have looked at all the background reports; we take into account your guilty plea and we also have obviously taken very careful account of your youth and we recognise that in order for us to consider sentence, we have to consider Article 4 of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994.  The Court considers that you do fall within Article 4(2)(a) and 4(2)(c), in other words you have a history of a failure to respond to non-custodial penalties and the Court is not satisfied that you are actually willing at the moment to respond to them but, in any event, the totality of the offending and I am thinking now about the breaking and entering into domestic premises at night, is so serious that a non-custodial sentence cannot be justified.  Now you have had an offer from your mother to offer you accommodation; we have taken into account that you are not prepared to take that up. 

3.        In all the circumstances the sentence of the Court is that on Count 1; 1 month's youth detention, on Count 2; 12 months' youth detention, the Court considers that a higher sentence might well have been appropriate but for your youth, and it is therefore reduced to 12 months in accordance with Article 4 (5) of the 1994 Law; and on Count 3; 1 month's youth detention, which would be concurrent, and on breach of the Community Service Order; 1 week's youth detention, concurrent and the existing Community Service Order is set aside. 

4.        What we have in mind is that, when you come out of youth detention, a line has been drawn under all these offences so you will not have anything further hanging over you but you must serve these sentences as a penalty for the offences which you have committed.  You will get some assistance while you are in the Young Offenders Centre and we strongly recommend to you that you engage with that and use it carefully, and we also recommend that when you come out you give further consideration to the offer which you have had from your mother whose presence in Jersey is something which the Court commends and we think you ought to take that offer into account.  You say that you want to get away from your friends and that is an opportunity to do so, to start afresh but of course, it will be entirely a matter for you. 

5.        For the avoidance of doubt we direct that the time that you have spent in Greenfields will count towards your sentence so that if there is any doubt under the various prison rules we direct that sentence is to be reduced by the amount of time spent on remand in Greenfields. 

6.        C, you stand to be sentenced for a count of receiving stolen property, for violently resisting arrest and as a result of those offences, you are in breach of the Community Service Order which you have mostly performed and you therefore come to be sentenced again, if we think that appropriate for those offences, some of which, particularly the affray, were really very serious. 

7.        The Court has taken account of the fact that the receiving of stolen property in this case is at the lower end of the scale of receiving stolen property.  Violently resisting arrest is a serious offence but, again in this case, the offending is at the lower end in the sense that you do not appear on the Crown's case to have aimed any blows at the police officers so it falls, as I say, at the lower end.  Because of your age we have had to again, to have regard to Article 4 of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994 and, as the Court thought last May, we think on this occasion that although the offence of receiving would justify a youth detention sentence, we feel that it is right to find an alternative to that custody if we can. 

8.        For these reasons the Court imposes on Count 4; 120 hours' Community Service Order, the alternative would be 6 months' youth detention, and for the avoidance of doubt, that community service is in addition to the balance which is left on the community service you were ordered to perform last May.  In relation to Count 5 the sentence of this Court is that you are put on probation for 6 months' and for breach of the existing Community Service Order, we order that that should stand so you have the 20 hours left to serve so that makes a total of 140 hours' community service which you must serve. 

9.        Mrs C, the Court ordered last May that you should stand as surety for your son's good behaviour in the sum of £500.  That was done partly as a direction to you, to keep him in order and partly, as a direction to him, for the feelings which he will have towards you, that he should behave himself and it is extremely saddening for the Court to find him letting you down in this way today.  We would normally have forfeited the entire £500.  Because of your change of circumstances since that was imposed, we are going to reduce that to £250.  We order you to pay that sum of money and we give you three months to pay it.  However, we also order that the balance of £250 surety should stand for the next six months.  That means that if your son re-offends during the next six months you will be liable to pay that sum of money again.  I should say that that last order is an order that is made by the Court by majority, one Jurat being in favour of making that order, the other Jurat not being in favour of making it, and I take the view that it is the right thing to do.  C, your mother is suffering a financial penalty because of your conduct.  The Court thinks that you should find some way of getting a job, legally, to pay her back and also you know as we do but I will say it for the avoidance of doubt, you have let her down once and the Court is anxious that you should know that we do not expect you to let her down again. 

Authorities

Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994.

Criminal Justice (Community Service Orders)(Jersey) Law 2001.

Whelan on Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Court of Jersey.

AG-v-A and Others [2009] JRC 107.

R-v-Bernard Webbe and Others [2002] 1 Crim.App.R. (S) 22.