Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2005]JRC176

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

19^th December, 2005

Before     :

Sir Philip Bailhache, Bailiff, and Jurats de Veulle and Bullen.

The Attorney General

-v-

Adrian Mark Bevis

Carla Louise Pita

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

Bevis

 

1 count 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:  heroin).
2 counts of:	Being concerned in the supplying of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(c) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978. (Counts 2 and 3: heroin).

Age:  35.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Bevis arranged for the importation of 1 gram of heroin by post (count 1).  On receipt of the same he offered to sell part of it to acquaintances.  He was arrested while attending on a potential buyer (count 2).  Pita was with him at the time and was also arrested.  She was found to be carrying 13 individual bags of heroin on behalf of Bevis with a total weight of just under ½ gram (count 4).

After their release, pending further enquiry, Bevis and Pita offered the sale of ten further grams of heroin to another acquaintance (Count 3).  The sale was not carried out but the offer was recorded in the text messages saved on Pita's mobile phone.

During a search of Pita's flat a stolen cheque was recovered from a kitchen drawer (count 6), together with various drugs paraphernalia.

Details of Mitigation:

Bevis:  Guilty pleas (albeit late); only small amount of drugs; addict who had not had assistance since his release from prison the previous year; already spent 10 months in custody.

Previous Convictions:

10 previous convictions comprising 16 offences, including a previous possession with intent to supply heroin which resulted in a 6½ year sentence of imprisonment.

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	Importation - 4 years' imprisonment.
Count 2:	Supply - 4 years' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 3:	Making an offer to supply - 30 months' imprisonment, but bearing in mind totality 12 months' imprisonment.

Total (applying totality principle) 5 years' imprisonment .

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Court said that Bevis deserved to go to prison, and had been a bad influence on Pita.  However, given the small quantities of drug involved, the Court felt able to follow the alternatives suggested by the Probation Service in relation to both defendants, and indicated that they were giving them their last chance.

2 year Probation Order.

Mandatory attendance on Drug and Alcohol Department for 1 year.

SMART Course.

Supervised Naltrexone treatment.

Complete abstinence from non-prescribed drugs.

240 hours' Community Service (the equivalent of 19 months' youth detention).

Pita

 

2 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply, contrary to Article 6 (2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978.  (Counts 4 and 5).
1 count of:	Hiding or withholding stolen property. (Count 6).

Age:  20.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Bevis above.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas (albeit late), no previous convictions; youth; young daughter; heroin addict.

Previous Convictions:

None.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 3:	Making an offer to supply (18 months' youth detention, but bearing in mind totality) - 11 months' youth detention.
Count 5	Possession with intent to supply - 18 months' youth detention.
Count 6:	Receiving a stolen cheque - 1 month's youth detention.

Total: (Applying totality principle) 2½ years' youth detention.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

2 year Probation Order.

Mandatory attendance on Drug and Alcohol Department for 1 year.

Supervised Naltrexone treatment.

Complete abstinence from non-prescribed drugs.

Hospital detoxification

80 hours' Community Service (the equivalent of 3 months' youth detention).

 

C.M.M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate S. Pearmain for Bevis.

Advocate D. Gilbert for Pita.

JUDGMENT

 

THE BAILIFF:

1.        The Court wishes to say first of all that addiction to heroin is a curse which is the rationale for the severe approach of this Court towards offences of drug trafficking.  Heroin ruins lives as it has been ruining the lives of these two defendants, and affecting their families as well.

2.        The approach of the Court to drug addicts is different because the Court wants so far as possible to assist addicts to reform themselves.  These two defendants, however, are addicts who are also to be sentenced for offences involving the supply of heroin, albeit in a small quantity. 

3.        The Court will deal first with Pita.  Pita, you have gone badly wrong for the last five years and you stand at a cross-roads of your life.  Either you are going to take a hold of your destiny, or you are going to go down hill and you will experience more prison and, more importantly, you will almost inevitably lose your daughter and see the collapse of your relationship with her. 

4.        You are an intelligent young woman.  You have the support of your mother and there is no reason at all why you should not succeed if you apply your mind to it.  It will not be easy.  You will have to overcome great difficulties and you will have to apply yourself whole heartedly to the task.  The stakes are high but we want you to know that the members of the Court want you to succeed.

5.        We are going to avoid a custodial sentence and we are going to accept the advice of the Probation Officer and the Director of the Drug and Alcohol Service and we are going to place you on probation for 2 years subject to a number of conditions.  Those conditions are that you will undertake a hospital detoxification from all non-prescribed drugs; that you will attend the Alcohol and Drug Service as required for a year; that you will take Naltrexone the opiate blocker under supervision as prescribed and you will abstain from all other non-prescribed medication during this period which will be confirmed by routine and regular drug testing.  You will also, whilst on probation, undertake the 20 session "Offending is not the only choice" programme.  We are also going to order you to perform some community service to help you, we hope, to make contact with people who are not involved in drug taking.  So you will perform 80 hours of community service to the satisfaction of the community service organiser, and we declare the alternative to that period of community service is a period of 3 months' youth detention.  The Court is giving you a chance.  If you do not take it, you will come back before this Court and it is almost inevitable that we shall have to sentence you to youth detention.

6.        Bevis, as you must know, you deserve to go to prison.  We think that you are not a good influence on your co-accused, who is 15 years younger than you.  You were the importer of the these drugs and I have to tell you that so far as you are concerned the Court is divided in its decision as to the sentence to be imposed.

7.        The majority have been persuaded to take the view that you are at a stage of your life where you might be able to turn things around.  You have abstained from drugs while you have been in prison.  You have undertaken a course in prison and you are in entitled to credit for all those things.  We take at face value your expression of a desire to rid yourself of drugs and to lead a life which is clean of drugs in the future.  You have the support of your parents which perhaps you do not deserve.

8.        The Court is going to impose a non-custodial sentence and is going to place you on Probation for a period of 2 years subject to a number of conditions.  Those conditions are that you will carry out the self-management and rational thinking programme organised by the Probation Service; there will be a mandatory treatment order with the Alcohol and Drug Service and you will be required to attend that for a period of 12 months.  It is also a condition that you will remain abstinent from non-prescribed drugs during that period and that you will be liable to routine and random testing for the purpose of confirming that abstinence, and finally that you will comply with all the treatment goals as directed by the Alcohol and Drugs Service including taking the drug Naltrexone under supervision. 

9.        We are also going to impose a Community Service Order of 240 hours, and we declare that the alternative to that Community Service Order is a sentence of 18 months' imprisonment. 

10.      As I said to your co-accused the Court wants you to be quite clear in your mind that we are giving you this chance which may very well be a last chance to turn your life around.  We hope that you will do so and we hope that we will not see you again, but if you are brought back before this Court it is almost inevitable that you will suffer a further custodial sentence. 

11.      We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

Rimmer Lusk & Bade -v- AG (2001) JLR373.

AG -v- Welsh (2000)JRC21.

McDonough -v- AG (1994) JLR N17a.

AG -v- Antunes [2003]JLR 144.

AG -v- Stephens (1998)JRC44.