Jersey Unreported Judgments

Inferior Number Sentencing - motoring - breach of orders

[2018]JRC106

Royal Court

(Samedi)

22 June 2018

Before     :

T. J. Le Cocq, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Crill and Dulake

The Attorney General

-v-

Joshua Peter O'Brien

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was committed after conviction at a trial in the Magistrate's Court in respect of the following charges:

Charge 1:	Taking a vehicle without the owner's consent.
Charge 2:	Using a vehicle without third party insurance.
Charge 3:	Driving whilst disqualified.
Charge 4:	Driving in excess of the speed limit.

The defendant also stood to be sentenced in respect of breaches of Probation and Community Service Orders by re-offending and also by way of non-compliance

Age:  29

Plea: Not guilty.

Details of Offence:

The defendant took his sister's car from her driveway without her knowledge or permission; he was stopped in a routine road check in St Mary at around 8:45pm; he had two others in the vehicle and did nothing to raise any suspicions, saying they were heading for the Priory Inn for something to eat 'and maybe a pint'.  Approximately 30 minutes later the same vehicle was stopped in a St Mary speed check, having approached at 30 mph in a 20 mph zone.  The defendant was asked to provide a sample of breath; he said he needed to relieve himself first and was allowed to go into a field to do so.  Once in the field the defendant ran off, leaving the other two occupants in the vehicle.  Attempts to locate him were unsuccessful.  The defendant's fingerprints were found in the driver's area of the vehicle; he was arrested some two months later.  At trial the defendant called one of the occupants of the vehicle as a defence witness, that witness would not say who the driver was although he clearly seemed to know; the Magistrate found him "a very poor witness" who was "evasive" and "untruthful".

The defendant's offending put him in further jeopardy as he had already breached current Probation and Community Service Orders imposed in the lower court by non-compliance (failing to attend meetings and refusing to work, despite warnings as to likely outcome) and these convictions added breach by re-offending.

On 12^th June, 2017, the defendant had been placed on Probation for 12 months and ordered to complete a total of 170 hours of Community Service by the Magistrate for the following offences:

Larceny - Probation Order & 100 hrs community service (or 4 months imprisonment) (Breach1)

Disorderly on Licensed Premises - Probation Order & 50 hrs community service, concurrent (or 1 months' imprisonment) (Breach 2)

Refusing to quit Licensed Premises - Probation Order (Breach 3)

Possession of Class C drug - Probation Order (Breach 4)

Possession of Class B drug - Probation Order (Breach 5)

Article 25 Prison (Jersey) Law 1957 - Probation Order & 120 hours community service (50 hours concurrent, 70 hours consecutive) (Breach 6)

Details of Mitigation:

Little available by way of mitigation; however despite pleading not guilty, following conviction and during the preparation of the probation report the defendant accepted full responsibility for the motoring offences

Previous Convictions:

Appalling record with 92 offences against his name, including 32 motoring offences, 13 of which involved taking and driving away or being carried, 6 driving without insurance and 5 driving whilst disqualified.

Conclusions:

Charge 1:	12 months' imprisonment, and disqualification from driving for 3 years.
Charge 2:	12 months' imprisonment, concurrent, and disqualification from driving for 3 years.
Charge 3:	12 months' imprisonment, concurrent, and disqualification from driving for 3 years.
Charge 4:	No separate penalty.

Breach of 12 Month Probation Order and 170 Hour Community Service Order (145 hours outstanding): Breach 1; 4 months' imprisonment sought; Breach 2; 1 month's imprisonment sought; Breach 6; 6 months' imprisonment sought, all to run concurrently, no separate penalties for Breaches 3, 4 & 5, making a total 6 months' imprisonment sought for the breaches, to run consecutive to the totality of the sentence imposed on the new charges.

Total: 18 months' imprisonment and disqualification from driving for 3 years.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

R. MacRae, Esq., Attorney General appeared for the Crown.

Advocate A Brown for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        You are to be sentenced for taking a vehicle without the owner's consent, using the vehicle without third party insurance, driving whilst disqualified and speeding, in respect of which you were convicted by the Magistrate's Court following a not guilty plea.  You are also to be dealt with for non-compliance with a Probation and Community Service Order.

2.        The facts of the offending have been set out by the Attorney General and you absconded from the scene and were only arrested some weeks later.  It cannot be said that you were co-operative in interview and you did not plead guilty and therefore do not have the benefit which is afforded to those who plead guilty to criminal offences.

3.        We accept the characterisation of the offending by the Crown and we note as the Crown has fully set out to us your lengthy criminal record.  The Attorney General characterises it as appalling and indeed it is.

4.        It is clear with regard to the breach offences that after an initial engagement with the Probation Service you missed appointments with greater and greater frequency and hence you are in breach of those orders.

5.        We also have to note the fact that you are on any analysis at a high risk of the re-conviction.  We have considered what weight we could give to the mitigation that is available to you, and we have read with care the references provided on your behalf, and they speak well of you, and we very much hope that in the future you will continue to put you family at the centre of your life and avoid future offending.  We have also read again the contents of the Social Enquiry Report and it is clear that you have had a difficult start in life, but those factors are factors that the courts have taken into account before, they are not new, and you have been given whatever credit that mitigation could afford you.  Early circumstances when taken into account by a court on earlier occasions can only carry you so far.

6.        Notwithstanding the mitigation that is available we see no alternative to a custodial sentence.  The chances that the court has afforded you many times in the past have been squandered and they have run out.

7.        We are therefore going to impose sentences precisely as moved forward by the Crown and those are the sentences with regard to the index offending and to the breaches that we impose. 

8.        We revoke the probation orders and community services orders.  

No Authorities