Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2011]JRC018

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

21^st January 2011

Before     :

W. J. Bailhache, Q.C., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Morgan and Kerley.

The Attorney General

-v-

Gary Cook (aka Persson)

Stephen Philip Hollis

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

Gary Cook

1 count of:

Supplying a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(b) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 1).

Age:  47.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Shortly after 5pm on Tuesday, 25^th August, 2010, Cook was seen outside the Original Wine Bar on Bath Street talking to another man.  A few minutes later the two entered the Bar and it was noted that Cook was carrying a rucksack. 

Holllis was seen leaving his home address at about 5:10pm and walking towards Bath Street.  He was not carrying anything.  About halfway down Belmont Road he met another man who is not involved in this case, they walked to the Bar and joined Cook and the other man already inside.  Cook was seen to gesture towards the rucksack at his feet; Hollis nodded and bent down towards it.  Cook and Hollis then left the Bar shortly afterwards, Hollis carrying a white carrier bag, subsequently found to contain cannabis resin. 

They were approached by police officers.  One of the officers took the carrier bag from Hollis and found that it contained two "nine bars" of cannabis resin (Counts 1 and 3).  Hollis was arrested for possession with intent to supply and cautioned, to which he made no reply.  The officer continued to search Hollis and found a small lump of resinous material (Count 2) and a small snap seal bag containing herbal material (Count 4) in his clothing. 

A second officer took Cook outside the entrance to the Bar.  He made no reply to caution, was searched and £390 was found in his back trouser pocket in three bundles of £100 and one of £90.  Both defendants were transported to Police Headquarters. 

Hollis' home address was searched.  A man was found in the living room smoking a joint of cannabis and was arrested.  A number of items were seized from the flat, including a lump of resinous material (Count 5), two sets of micro-weight scales and a mobile phone which was set to "calculator" mode.  A list of names and numbers consistent with deal lists relating to wholesale quantities of cannabis was also found.  Assuming no duplication these figures add up to £9,645. 

Both defendants were interviewed.  Hollis told officers that he was unemployed and had no legitimate income.  He said that any cannabis found in the flat belonged to him.  He also admitted to having known Cook since he moved to Jersey two and a half years earlier.  When questioned specifically about the "nine bars" found in his possession he answered "no comment" to most questions.  He denied that Cook supplied him with the "nine bars".  Hollis admitted that he was in possession of the bars, but it appears he did so inadvertently.  He stated that he used the scales to double check that he had not been sold underweight amounts of cannabis.  Cook told officers that he had been working as a painter decorator in St John before going to the pub.  When asked about the arrangement he had with Hollis and anything in relation to the cannabis he exercised his right to silence. 

The "nine bars" were confirmed as cannabis resin weighing a total of 451.79 grams.  The lump of resin was cannabis resin weighing 199 milligrams and the herbal material was herbal cannabis weighing 689 milligrams.  These bars had a potential street value of between £1,260 and £1,440 each (£2,520 to £2,880 in total), and wholesale value which could lie between £900 and £1,100 (£1,800 to £2,200 in total). 

Cook is assessed as being at low risk of re-offending and no risk to the public, although the report does take note of his previous convictions for violence.  Hollis is assessed as being at high risk of re-offending but unsuited to a period of probation.  Hollis now admits that he had been supplying cannabis to fund his own habit, which cost him up to £40 per day. 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea; no previous convictions. 

Previous Convictions:

Fifteen convictions for twenty nine offences.  These include five offences against the person and sixteen theft and kindred offences, but no drug offences. 

Conclusions:

Count 1:

Starting point 15 months' imprisonment.  7 months and 11 days' imprisonment (which would lead to his immediate release).

Confiscation Order in the sum of £390 sought.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:

8½ months' imprisonment.

Confiscation Order in the sum of £390 made. 

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered. 

Stephen Philip Hollis

3 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Counts 2, 4 and 5).
1 count of:	Possession of a controlled drug, with intent to supply to another, contrary to Article 8(2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 3).

Age:  31.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Cook above.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty plea; constructive use of time while on remand. 

Previous Convictions:

Sixteen convictions for thirty one offences.  These include six drug offences, the most recent of which were two offences of possession of cannabis for which he was fined. 

Conclusions:

Starting point 15 months' imprisonment. 

Count 2:	2 weeks' imprisonment.
Count 3:	8 months' imprisonment, consecutive.
Count 4:	2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent to Count 2.
Count 5:	2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent to Count 2.

Total:  8 months and 2 weeks' imprisonment. 

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 2:	2 weeks' imprisonment.
Count 3:	8½ months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 5:	2 weeks' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total:  8½ months' imprisonment. 

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered. 

R. C. P. Pedley, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate J. M. Grace for Cook.

Advocate C. R. Baglin for Hollis.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Mr Cook, Mr Hollis, you are here to be sentenced on an Indictment involving trafficking in cannabis.  Mr Cook you face one count of supplying a controlled drug and Mr Hollis you have three counts of possession and one, the more important, a count of possession with intent to supply.  The facts involved the supply and possession with intent to supply, respectively, of two nine bars of cannabis, total weight was 451.79 grams and the street value of just under £3,000. 

2.        The principles on the sentencing of these offences are clearly laid down in the case of Campbell and the Court therefore applies those principles.  Having looked at the facts in the summary the Court considers that you both need to be treated in very much the same way.  We have taken a starting point of 15 months.  We allow you a full discount for your guilty plea which you have entered and we note that there is really no substantial mitigation for good character for either of you and no mitigation for youth for either of you.  We are prepared to allow something off the sentence for whatever other personal mitigation, such as it is, that you have, we have certainly taken into account everything that your counsel has said and we have looked carefully at the background reports, and in particular wish to commend you on your constructive use of the time that you have spent in prison. 

3.        But you must be sentenced for what you have done and in the circumstances the Court is going to sentence you Mr Cook to the period of 8½ months' imprisonment on Count 1.

4.        Mr Hollis, to 2 weeks on Count 2; 8½ months on Count 3; 2 weeks on Count 4; 2 weeks on Count 5, those will all be served concurrently making a total of 8½ months. 

5.        We also order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs. 

Authorities

AG-v-Hodgson [2003] JRC 070.

AG-v-Skeete 2002/130.

AG-v-Dunn [2009] JRC 121.

Campbell and Others-v-AG [1995] JLR 136.