Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - drugs - possession - Class B - speeding - breach of orders.

[2016]JRC010

Royal Court

(Samedi)

15 January 2016

Before     :

J. A. Clyde-Smith, Esq., Commissioner, and Jurats Crill and Thomas

The Attorney General

-v-

Brandon Jules Emile Peter Dubois

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

1 count of:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 1).
1 count of:	Speeding, contrary to Article 21 of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 (Count 2).

Age:  22.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

On Friday 21^st August, 2015, a warrant issued under the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 was executed at the defendant's home address.  Officers recovered a number of exhibits including a bag which contained just over 60 grams of predominately herbal cannabis, with a small amount of cannabis resin, worth between £900 and £1,500. 

In interview the defendant admitted that all the items seized belonged to him.  It was accepted that despite the amount of cannabis recovered the defendant had bought in bulk and had no intention to supply any of it. 

On Friday 16^th October, 2015, at approximately 10pm the defendant was driving a green Ford Fiesta along La Grande Route de St Clement where there is a 30 mph speed limit.  A speed check by the FB fields showed that the vehicle was being driven at 50mph.  The weather was good and the road surface dry.  He had retaken and passed his test only two days previously, following a prior disqualification. 

The defendant was also suspended from the Community Service Scheme due to poor attendance and attitude at the time of his arrest for the drug offences. 

Details of Mitigation:

The defendant has the benefit of guilty pleas and is still a young man.  He is in employment and is said to be developing skills in IT. 

Previous Convictions:

The defendant has a poor record with five drug offences recorded (2012 and 2015) including possession and cultivation of cannabis.  There are nine motoring offences (2013, 2011 and 2009), among others of violence and theft.  He has not performed well in previous community service orders, and has breached both community service (2012) and exclusion orders (2015). 

Conclusions:

Count 1:	1 month's imprisonment.
Count 2:	£200 fine or 12 days' imprisonment in default, with 28 days to pay.

Breach of Community Service Order imposed by the Royal Court on 27^th February, 2015:-original order to be discharged and the exact equivalent sentence for the outstanding hours would be 3 months and 1 week but the Crown is content to move for 3 months' imprisonment, consecutive to the current Indictment.

Total:- 4 months' imprisonment together with a £200 fine to be paid within 28 days or 12 days' imprisonment in default.

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

E. L. Hollywood, Crown Advocate.

Advocate H. J. Heath for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        The defendant has committed two offences, namely possession of cannabis and speeding, which place him in breach of probation and community service orders imposed on 27^th February, 2015.  On that occasion he was sentenced for importing a class B drug, possession of 43 tablets of the class C drug, malicious damage to a taxi, conduct likely to cause a breach of the peace and grave and criminal assault.  The defendant had, at that time, a bad record having spent the previous 8 months in custody and in sentencing the court said this :-

"We are not going to send you to prison but you should go to prison and you are not going to go there because there is still just a chance that you can put things right; you have said all the right things in your letter but, you will forgive us for saying, that we see often in Court people saying the right things and it is a question of what they do as well as what they say.  Although things for you have not always gone very well, the fact of the matter is that you can always blame someone else for what goes wrong and ultimately it is you and you alone who can make decisions for your future.  Because if you carry on going the way you have been you are going to be spending long periods of time in custody and whether you are or you are not is down to you - it is not down to anybody else.  With quite a lot of hesitation we are going to give you that chance today but it is down to you to make sure you do not come back again.  We see your sister is here which is good and you have support from your stepfather now which is also good so there are other people trying to make it work for you and that is what you should take along with you as their commitment and make sure that you make that commitment too.

You must do your community service and you must act in accordance with the probations officer's requirements for you.  If you are referred back to this Court or breach probation or for not doing the community service order, you are liable to be sentenced on these offences again and in that case it is very hard to see how a Court will avoid a custodial sentence then so treat that as being really serious.  You must perform that community service."

2.        The defendant's compliance with the provisions of the community service order had been poor in the past but on this occasion he assured Mr Le Marrec, the assistant community service manager, that there would be no repeat of his previous non-compliance, unwillingness to challenge the boundaries of the scheme and those who supervise him.  He got off to a good start but in time he began again not to attend and to challenge the supervision officer.  He became aggressive and abusive towards the officers and staff.  The report records that he "was particularly unpleasant towards them".  Following final warnings he was suspended from the scheme and the matter was referred to the Attorney General.  A meeting with the Attorney General never took place because of the current offending.  He has completed 55 hours of community service and therefore has an outstanding balance of 65 hours to complete. 

3.        By way of mitigation it is the case that the defendant was generally doing well with the probation side of the order; he was keeping fit and developing his IT skills.  He was also making very good use of his leisure time.  He is still young (age 22) and is in employment and he is supported by his mother in Court who has written a letter to us and we also have a reference. 

4.        If the defendant had carried out his work under the community service order to the satisfaction of the community service officers, then we might well have continued with the community service order.  He has not done so and this after the clearest warning from the Bailiff and his assuring Mr Le Marrec that he would not repeat his previous behaviour under earlier orders.  Not only that, but he has been abusive and aggressive towards the community service staff. 

5.        In our view this conduct is intolerable and we can see no reason to expose the community service staff to such conduct in the future by continuing the community service order.  The fact of the matter is that the defendant has treated both this Court and the community service staff with contempt.  It is very sad because the defendant has otherwise made progress and the Court always bends over backwards to assist young people as it has done in his case.  But the defendant has had his last chance. 

6.        Those who are given community service are given a chance to remain in the community and must perform that community service to the satisfaction of the relevant officers.  They must know that if they do not do so then the Court will, unless there are exceptional circumstances, impose the custodial sentence for which community service was the alternative.  Abuse of the officers supervising this scheme will not be tolerated. 

7.        Therefore under the current Indictment, Count 1 you are sentenced to 1 month's imprisonment, Count 2; £200 fine with 28 days in which to pay, or 12 days' imprisonment in default, for breach of the community service we discharge the community service order and the probation order and for those original offences sentence you to 3 months' imprisonment, to run consecutively to the current Indictment.  That of course takes into account the equivalent sentence you have already served by doing the numbers of hours that you have done.  That makes a total of 4 months' imprisonment and a fine of £200.  Having said that we do very much hope that you will continue the progress that you undoubtedly have made.  You clearly have real issues over anger management and we hope that you are able to undertake whatever courses may be available to you in prison. 

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

Authorities

AG-v-Dubois [2015] JRC 049A.

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