BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £1, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
Jersey Unreported Judgments |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> AG -v- Dryden- [2014] JRC 172 (15 September 2014) URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2014/2014_172.html Cite as: [2014] JRC 172 |
[New search] [Help]
Superior Number Sentencing -drugs - possession with intent to supply - Class B.
Before : |
J. A. Clyde-Smith, Esq., Commissioner with Jurats Kerley, Marett-Crosby, Nicolle, Milner, Olsen and Blampied. |
The Attorney General
-v-
Anthony Andrew Dryden
Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 11th July, 2009, following a guilty plea to the following charges:
1 count of: |
Possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply it to another, contrary to Article 8(2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 1). |
1 count of: |
Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 2). |
Age: 24.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
During a search of the defendant's house, just under 2 kg of mephedrone was found in 6 plastic containers.
The maximum street value of these drugs is approximately £119,000, equating to £60 per gram. The wholesale price is estimated to be approximately £10 per gram.
During interview the defendant admitted to actively acting as a 'minder' for a friend and was aware the containers contained some form of illegal drugs. Call logs were seized from the defendant's phone and showed a continuous communication with the same friend for whom he was 'minding' the drugs (Count 1).
In addition 1.23g of cannabis was also found during the search (Count 2).
Details of Mitigation:
The defendant was remorseful for his actions, pleaded guilty and was cooperative with Customs.
Previous Convictions:
Ten previous convictions, including possession of cannabis.
Conclusions:
Count 1: |
3½ years' imprisonment. |
Count 2: |
1 month's imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 3½ years' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
Count 1: |
2 years and 9 months' imprisonment. |
Count 2: |
1 month's imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total: 2 years and 9 months' imprisonment.
Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.
C. M. M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.
Advocate L. V. Marks for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE commissioner:
1. The defendant stands to be sentenced for possession of the Class B drug, mephedrone, one of the new psychoactive substances or NPS's, with intent to supply and possession of 1.23 grams of cannabis resin. The mephedrone weighed almost 2 kilograms and the maximum street value of which is approximately £119,000. We were told that the wholesale price would be £10 per gram or £20,000.
2. The defendant told the police at interview that he had been asked by a close friend to look after the package containing what he thought would be cannabis and which, when he saw the contents, he thought might have been cocaine. He was not sure if he was going to be paid, he said that had not yet been discussed and he had not heard of mephedrone before and he did not think the package was worth anything like the sum of £119,000.
3. There are no sentencing guidelines for offences involving Class B drugs other than cannabis as submitted by the prosecution, but there have been a number of cases involving NPS's with a much lower street value where young male offenders have ordered the drugs over the internet. In those cases the defendants were dealt with by way of community service. In the case of AG v Diogo [2014] JRC 153 the Court extracted the following principles from those cases:-
4. Now this case is within the category C Campbell guidelines which as stated provide that for a weight of 1 - 10 kilograms there should be a starting point of between 2 and 6 years. The Court pointed out in AG v L'Enfant [2013] JRC 169 that there are difficulties in applying these guidelines partly because street values attributed to those guidelines need to be updated but also because, quoting from paragraph 5 of the judgment in L'Enfant:-
5. The prosecution have indicated a starting point of 6 years which is the top of the range set out in the Campbell guidelines and have moved, after allowing for mitigation, for a sentence of 3½ years for this importation. In terms of mitigation the defendant has pleaded guilty and he was co-operative with the Customs. We received and read his letter of remorse and the other letters and we note the presence of his family supporting him here in Court today. We have also had consideration to the other documents that have been before the Court. As Advocate Marks, however, has pointed out the Campbell guidelines expressly apply to all cases involving the trafficking of Class B drugs. This is in fact the first case involving NPS's which has come within the Campbell guidelines and after consideration we have come to the view that for consistency we should apply those guidelines. It troubles us that we have no expert evidence as to the danger done by these drug, save that they have of course been classified as Class B prohibited drugs for good reason by the States of Jersey and their importation therefor must be damaging to the community. Anecdotally there have been reports of deaths resulting from their use.
6. Taking the weight of these drugs the starting point would be around 2-3 years, applying Campbell but as made clear in L'Enfant street value is a relevant factor and in a view of the street value of the drugs imported here, we think this justifies increasing the starting point within the Campbell guidelines, but not to 6 years. We determine the correct starting point as being 5 years. And we would just add, as made clear by the Court of Appeal in the case of Vipond v AG [2004] JCA 086:-
7. In relation to Count 1 you are sentenced to 2 years' and 9 months' imprisonment, to Count 2 to 1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.
8. We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.