Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2004]JRC019

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

28^th January, 2004

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Douglas Alan Quinault;

David Michael Haywood.

 

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the Defendants were remanded by the Inferior Number on 12th December, 2003, on a guilty plea to the following counts:

 

Douglas Alan Quinault

 

2 counts of:

being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law, 1999 Count 1: diamorphine; Count 2: cocaine.

 

Age:     39.

 

Details of Offence:

David Haywood and Douglas Quinault travelled to Jersey from England on the Condor Fast Ferry from Weymouth.  Each had concealed packages of heroin and cocaine.  The packages were secreted internally, in an attempt to avoid customs detection.  When stopped by Customs Officers they identified themselves initially stating that they were in Jersey for a short fishing holiday.  They were then taken to separate examination areas and simultaneously questioned.  When asked to provide urine samples they both admitted they had concealed drugs internally.

Quantities

Haywood:          Heroin 82.13g (57%) plus cocaine 54.53g (92%).

Quinault:           Heroin 58.37g (58%) plus cocaine 14.27g (91%).

Aggravating circumstances:  Amount of drugs; two types of Class A drugs; cocaine of high purity; and commercial basis for financial gain.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas.  Couriers.

Single.  Pressure put on Quinault to import drugs.  Depression and personal circumstances meant that he was not equipped to deal with the pressure.  He was out of trouble for a while, but his marriage broke down and his life deteriorated.  He spent 6 weeks in a mental hospital and has suffered from depression ever since.  Has found it difficult to get work.  Has never been a heroin user himself.  Offence committed to reduce a drugs debt.

 

Previous Convictions:

No drug related convictions.  Mainly dishonesty or public order offences.  Nothing since drunk and disorderly plus obstructing PC in 2000.

 

Conclusions:

Starting point: 10 years' imprisonment.

7½ years' imprisonment.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Starting point: 9 years' imprisonment.

 

Count 1:	6 years' imprisonment.
Count 2:	4 years' imprisonment. concurrent.

 

The Court adopted the Valler principles, but also bore in mind the total weight of powder from class A drugs as a check on the right level when determining the appropriate starting points.

 

Quinault imported a total of approximately 72g of Class A drugs which would give a starting point of 9 -11 years.  He was a courier.  He used the same excuse as Haywood.  Although not charged jointly.  The Court took into account in mitigation his guilty plea, his poor record, his Social Enquiry Report and depression he had suffered.

 

David Michael Haywood

 

2 counts of:

Being knowingly concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 61(2)(b) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law, 1999 Count 3: diamorphine; Count 4: cocaine.

 

Age:     39.

 

Details of Offence:

See Quinault above.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas.  Couriers.  Single, living in council accommodation.  Offence arose out of financial pressures due to debts from cigarette smuggling.  (Pointed out that caused by own reprehensible conduct).  One drug related previous conviction.  Offending has greatly reduced.  Matters outlined generally in Social Enquiry Report.

 

Previous Convictions:

One drug related - fined for possession of cannabis.  Mainly dishonesty offences.  Nothing since a driving offence in 1999.

 

Conclusions:

Starting point:  11 years' imprisonment.

8 years' imprisonment.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Starting point: 10 years' imprisonment.

 

Count 3:	6½ years' imprisonment.
Count 4:	5½ years' imprisonment , concurrent.

 

The Court adopted the Valler principles, but also bore in mind the total weight of powder from class A drugs as a check on the right level when determining the appropriate starting points.

 

Haywood imported a total of approximately 136 grams of class A drugs which would give a starting point of 10 -13 years.  He was a courier.  The importation had taken place to wipe out depbts incurred by a failed attempt to avoid duty payable upon cigarettes.  The court took into account in mitigation his guilty plea, remorse and his much improved record and Social Enquiry Report.

 

S.M. Baker, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate Mrs S.A. Pearmain for D.A. Quinault.

Advocate J. Bell for D.M. Haywood.

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

 

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Haywood you imported 82 grams of heroin and 54 grams of cocaine concealed internally.  You did this at the behest of a dealer to whom who had run up a debt of some £7,000 in respect of the smuggling of cigarettes, which had apparently been confiscated by Customs when you tried to take them into the United Kingdom.  You were told that the drug run to Jersey would clear your debt. 

2.        We have to consider first the starting point.  The Crown has suggested 11 years and we clearly have to apply the case of Valler - AG [2002]JLR383 because we have two batches of drugs.  Nevertheless, because these are both powder drugs we think it best to look at the combined weight which is 136 grams.  That would put you in the bracket of 100 - 250 grams i.e. a 10 to 13 years' starting point.  Taking account of the fact that you were a courier, of the unsophisticated conduct when you arrived in Jersey, and of the amount, we think the right starting point is 10 years.

3.        Having regard to mitigation we take into account your guilty plea and your remorse.  Although you have a poor record, it has much improved in recent years, particularly, from 1992 - 1998 when you were married, and that has basically survived even after you developed a serious addiction to 'speed'; and still there have been no serious offences.  All that stands you in good stead.

4.        We take account of the Social Enquiry Report and all the mitigation which appears from the papers before us.  All in all we think the correct total deduction to reflect the totality of the mitigation is 3½ years.  Therefore, on count 3 the sentence will be 6½ years; on count 4, 5½ years concurrent and we order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

5.        Quinault, you imported 58 grams of heroin and 14 grams of cocaine also concealed internally.  You are not charged jointly but you came in company with Haywood and you both gave the same excuse about coming over for a fishing trip. 

6.        You came because you were told that doing the run would clear off a drug debt of £500 in respect of your cannabis dependency.  In relation to the starting point, we again look for a check at the total amount; in your case 72 grams.  This puts you in the Rimmer [2001]JLR373 bracket dealing with 50 to 100 grams where the starting point is 9 - 11 years.  Again, taking into account the amount, your rôle as courier, and the unsophisticated nature of your conduct, we think that the correct starting point is 9 years.

7.        In mitigation we take into account your plea of guilty, entered, as with your colleague, at an early stage.  You too have a poor record, but you too have done much better recently; particularly, during your marriage.  Even though that has ended, there have been no further offences.

8.        We take into account everything that appears in the Social Enquiry Report, your clinical depression and the Drug and Alcohol Report and the other matters Mrs Pearmain has put forward and we think in aggregate a deduction of 3 years is right.  So on count 1, the sentence will be 6 years; on count 2, 4 years concurrent.  A total of 6 years' imprisonment  and we order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

Rimmer Lusk & Bade -v- AG [2001]JLR373.

Valler -v- AG [2002]JLR383.