Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - drugs - production - possession - Class B.

[2016]JRC019

Royal Court

(Samedi)

21 January 2016

Before     :

Sir Michael Birt, Commissioner, and Jurats Nicolle and Thomas

The Attorney General

-v-

Shaun Mark Carrel

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

1 count of:	Being concerned in the production of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(a) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 1).
1 count of:	Possession of utensils for the purpose of committing an offence against the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 2).
Count 4:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 4).

Age:  25.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

In February 2015 police officers executed a warrant at the defendant's home address in St Peter.  They found growing tents containing four cannabis plants and a large amount of sophisticated equipment for cultivating cannabis including two further purpose built growing tents, a lighting system, a hydroponic feeding system, an air extraction system, a quantity of various and specialised liquid plant nutrients and a lot of equipment ready for further production, including another growing tent, two hydroponic grow trays, temperature water heaters, heavy duty electric fans and timer switches and propagation blocks.  They also found a lot of cannabis leaf in the defendant's bedroom and a substantial amount of cash - £10,000 in one location and £3,760 in another.  Harvested cannabis was also found and on the defendant's 'phone, evidence of previous cultivation the previous year. 

In the defendant's interview he answered "No comment" in relation to the offences and indicated that he felt he had done nothing wrong.  He was generally unhelpful to the police.  The cannabis value, including the leaf and plants seized, had a total value of between approximately £10,000 and £25,000. 

The defendant pleaded guilty and advanced a basis of plea to the effect that he had supplied some of his cannabis to friends in the past without payment and would do so again.  Accordingly, he was only involved in social supply. 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas; basis of plea; absence of convictions and various difficulties with mental health.  He has now, he says, given up cannabis. 

Previous Convictions:

No convictions.  A number of non-relevant cautions and one caution in 2009 for possession of cannabis. 

Conclusions:

Count 1:	15 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	12 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 4:	3 months' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 15 months' imprisonment. 

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs and utensils sought. 

Confiscation Order hearing adjourned for a date to be fixed.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Count 1:	210 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 15 months' imprisonment, together with a 12 month Probation Order.
Count 2:	180 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 12 months' imprisonment, together with a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.
Count 4:	90 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 3 months' imprisonment, together with a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.

Total: 210 hours' Community Service Order, equivalent to 15 months' imprisonment, together with a 12 month Probation Order. 

Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and utensils ordered.

Confiscation Order hearing adjourned for a date to be fixed (15^th April, 2015).  Defence to serve statement in response to Crown's statement in relation to confiscation within 28 days of today.  Random drug testing.  The Court held that the Psychiatric Report and the fact that the defendant had given up cannabis had saved him.  He was a hair's breadth from prison. 

Advocate R. J. MacRae, Attorney General.

Advocate J. C. Turnbull for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        You were using your bedroom to grow cannabis, it was a sophisticated set-up as described by the Attorney General and there was also equipment in the lounge from which it was clear you were going to increase your production.  Now you say the production was entirely for your personal use, although you accept that you have, in the past, supplied your cannabis to other like-minded people on a social basis, and you would, in all likelihood, have done so again.  This is the agreed basis of your plea and therefore the Court has no option but to proceed on the basis of the version put forward which the Crown has accepted. 

2.        In mitigation you have pleaded guilty.  We have had particular regard to the background report and the psychiatric report and these are particularly significant in this case.  They show that whilst you do not have Asperger's syndrome as such, you certainly do have problems of social interaction. You get easily fixated on matters and you tend to take things very literally, which may explain some of the misunderstandings outlined in the papers.  We also have noted your advocate's assertion that since this came to light you have given up your use of cannabis which hitherto you were extremely dependent upon it and, indeed, I think your counsel himself referred to it being an addiction.  Now on reading the papers all members of the Court felt that there was no alternative but for you to go to prison.  The Court's policy is clear and growing cannabis in the way that you have would normally lead to imprisonment.  But the Jurats have just been persuaded that this is an exceptional case and that it would be right to proceed by way of a non-custodial sentence. 

3.        So the order of the Court is as follows.  On Count 1; 210 hours' Community Service Order, on Count 2; 180 hours' Community Service Order, on Count 4; 90 hours' Community Service Order, all of those concurrent, making a total of 210 hours, which is the equivalent of 15 months' imprisonment.  Although the probation report felt unable to recommend probation, that was on the basis of what you said to them.  Your advocate has assured us today that you would cooperate with probation and we think you would benefit from it, as indeed the probation officer originally thought.  Also we think it is important that you be subject to random drug testing to see whether you are telling the truth in saying that you have given up cannabis.  So we impose a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent on each count as well, and we impose a condition that you undergo random drug testing as directed by the Drug and Alcohol Service. 

4.        Now I just want you to understand very clearly how lucky you have been.  It has been a hair's breadth decision as to whether you should go to prison.  So if you do not do the community service properly, or if you do not do exactly what the probation officer tells you, or if you refuse to undertake the drug tests, or, of course, if you commit any other offence like smoking cannabis again, then you can be brought back here to be resentenced for these offences and if you are brought back, we see absolutely no alternative but to you then going to prison.  So this is your chance; if you behave well and cooperate with everyone and do not commit a further offence by smoking cannabis or doing anything else, then you will not come back here; but if you are brought back here then it seems inevitable that you will go to prison. 

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

6.        As to the Confiscation Order, we direct the parties to fix a date within 7 days and we order the defendant to file a response to the Attorney General's statement within 28 days. 

Authorities

AG v Bisson [2009] JRC 151.

AG v Mills [2009] JRC 235.

AG v Louis & Ors [2008] JRC 032.

AG v Williamson [2011] JRC 232.

AG v Read [2012] JRC 004.

AG v Rodrigues [2014] JRC 075.

AG v Thompson [2015] JRC 165.

AG v Lane [2015] JRC 026.