[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback]
	Jersey Unreported Judgments
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> 1999/153 - AG v McMinn [1999] UR 153 (13 September 1999) URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/1999/153.html Cite as: [1999] UR 153

[New search] [Contents list] [Help]

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

13^th September, 1999

Before: F.C. Hamon, Esq., Deputy Bailiff,

Jurats Le Breton, Potter.

The Attorney General

-v-

Harold John McMinn

Application for review of refusal of bail in

the Magistrate’s Court

On 23 July 1999 the applicant reserved his plea to 1 count of possession of a controlled drug (MDMA) contrary to Article 6 (1) of the Misues of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (count 1); pleaded guilty to 1 count of possession of a controlled drug (cannabis resin) contrary to Article A 6 (1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (count 2); and pleaded not guilty to 1 count of possession of a controlled drug (MDMA) with intent to supply, contrary to Article 6 (2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978. Bail was refused and the applicant was remanded in custody.

On 23 July, 11 and 20 August 1999 bail was refused.

On 1 September 1999 the applicant pleaded not guilty to 1 count of criminally receiving, hiding or withholding goods, knowing them to have been stolen and was remanded in custody; bail application adjourned.

On 2 September 1999 bail was refused

Application refused

C E Whelan, Crown Advocate

Advocate R Tremoceiro for the Accused

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: On this application we have to consider a review of the Magistrate’s decision. The alleged receiving of a bracelet worth some £600 on 10 July 1999 will now be dealt with in the Magistrate’s Court and we are only concerned here with the alleged possession with intent to supply 96 ecstasy tablets with a street value of £1,400 found in a personal sponge bag in a cupboard in the bathroom in the flat of the applicant. That was found when the search was being carried out for the bracelet.

According to the Acting Attorney General, McMinn said in interview that the ecstasy was for his personal use. He has now resiled from that statement but if he were to be found guilty he would face a sentence of some 5 years imprisonment. That alone is, in our view, sufficient and we need go no further. Bail is refused.

Authorities

AG v Makarios (1979) JJ 85.