Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2010]JRC008

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

15^th January 2010

Before     :

W. J. Bailhache, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Clapham and Liddiard.

The Attorney General

-v-

Stacey Marie Goggin

Roberto Miguel Andrade Rodrigues

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

Stacey Marie Goggin

First Indictment

1 count of:	Using a motor vehicle uninsured against third party risks, contrary to Article 2(1) of the Motor Traffic (Third Party Insurance)(Jersey) Law 1948, as amended (Count 1).
1 count of:	Driving without a licence, contrary to Article 4(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 (Count 2).
1 count of:	Careless driving contrary to Article 25(1) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 (Count 3).
1 count of:	Permitting a person to use a motor vehicle uninsured against third party risks, contrary to Article 2(1) of the Motor Traffic (Third Party Insurance)(Jersey) Law 1948 (Count 4).
1 count of:	Assault (Count 5).
1 count of:	Obstructing a Police Officer (Count 6).

Second Indictment

2 counts of:	Obtaining services by false pretences (Counts 1 and 2).
2 counts of:	Attempting to obtain services by false pretences (Counts 3 and 4).
1 count of:	Larceny (Count 5).
2 counts of:	Possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 8(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Counts 6 and 7).

Age:  19.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

First Indictment

On 9^th May, 2009, Goggin was involved in an accident on Mount Bingham, when she drove her Peugeot into the back of another car (Count 3).  Her car was displaying L plates at the time and Rodrigues was in the passenger seat.  She told officers at the scene that she had a licence, but the following day she attended the Police Station and admitted that she had no licence and no insurance (Counts 1 and 2).  She was released pending charge. 

On 24^th June, 2009, PC Sykes saw Rodrigues driving Goggin's Peugeot back to her house.  At the time he had no insurance and was disqualified from driving (Counts 7 and 8).  When he stopped outside Goggin's house PC Sykes approached the car to arrest him. 

Rodrigues began arguing with the officer and Goggin came out of the house.  She too began being abusive to the officer.  Despite being told to move away she did not and ignored PC Sykes' orders not to engage with Rodrigues (Count 6). 

PC Sykes then arrested Rodrigues and went to put him in the back of the patrol car.  Rodrigues was violent and once in the car kicked out at the officer with his feet, hitting the officer in the face and upper body.  He also bit PC Sykes on the arm, drawing blood (Count 9).  Rodrigues also caused £483 worth of damage to the patrol car (Count 10).  Whilst the officer was trying to restrain Rodrigues, Goggin kicked him several times to the ankles (Count 5). 

PC Sykes had to strike Rodrigues to the face in order to restrain him.  Further officers arrived and Rodrigues was taken to Police Headquarters.  He was very uncooperative and argued and used foul language throughout the interview, claiming that the officer had assaulted him first causing him to react the way he did. 

Goggin was also arrested and admitted refusing to obey the officer because she was "mad".  However, she denied kicking him.  Both defendants were charged and Rodrigues was remanded into custody.  Goggin was granted bail. 

Second Indictment

At the time of her release, Goggin was prescribed diazepam on a strict daily dose.  On 3^rd July, 2009, she presented two prescriptions for a total of 28 tablets at Lloyds Chemist in David Place.  Goggin had scribbled out the Doctor's instruction not to dispense more than 1 dose per day, and Goggin thus obtained the full prescription by false pretences (Counts 1 and 2).  On 10^th July, 2009, Goggin attempted to perform the same deception with two similarly altered prescriptions for 28 tablets.  On this occasion however, the chemist became suspicious and refused to dispense the drugs (Counts 3 and 4) and instead contacted the police.  In subsequent interview, Goggin gave no comment about the prescriptions.  She was charged and reserved her pleas and was granted continued bail. 

On 2^nd October, once all of the existing charges had been committed to the Royal Court, Goggin was apprehended stealing clothes worth £61 from New Look (Count 5).  During a search Goggin was found to be carrying a quantity of prescription diazepam and a personal amount of cannabis (Count 6).  A subsequent search of her home address revealed a further personal amount of herbal cannabis (Count 7). 

Goggin was brought back to Court on 5^th November, 2009 whereupon she was remanded into custody pending sentence. 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas, youth, recent death of sister and father, bullied at school, heroin addict, carer of daughter (her child with Rodrigues), last offending in 2006, remorse.

Previous Convictions:

12 previous convictions comprising 41 offences, including 10 against the person, 8 against property, 5 for theft and kindred offences and 13 relating inter alia to the Police.  None for drugs.

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Count 1:	6 months' youth detention, plus 2 years' disqualification from driving.
Count 2:	£100 fine or 2 weeks' youth detention in default, concurrent.
Count 3:	£200 fine or 1 month's youth detention in default, concurrent.
Count 4:	6 months' youth detention, concurrent, plus 2 years' disqualification from driving.
Count 5:	4 months' youth detention, consecutive to Count 1.
Count 6:	2 weeks' youth detention, concurrent.

Second Indictment

Count 1:	3 months' youth detention, consecutive to Count 1 of the First Indictment.
Count 2:	3 months' youth detention, concurrent.
Count 3:	2 months' youth detention, concurrent.
Count 4:	2 months' youth detention, concurrent.
Count 5:	2 months' youth detention, consecutive to Count 1.
Count 6:	2 weeks' youth detention, concurrent.
Count 7:	1 week's youth detention, concurrent.

Total:  15 months' youth detention plus 2 years' disqualification from driving and £300 in fines or 1 month and 2 weeks' youth detention in default.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

With a very poor record and a large amount of recent offending, the Court agreed that the Crown's conclusions were absolutely right.  However, taking into account the time spent in youth custody while on remand and other mitigation, the Court ordered a:-

First Indictment

Count 1:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation Order plus 2 years' disqualification from driving.
Count 2:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.
Count 3:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.
Count 4:	120 hours' Community Service order and a 12 month Probation Order plus 2 years' disqualification from driving, concurrent.
Count 5:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.
Count 6:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.

Second Indictment

Count 1:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent to Count 1 of the First Indictment.
Count 2:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.
Count 3:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.
Count 4:	120 hours' Community Service order and a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.
Count 5:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.
Count 6:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation Order, concurrent.
Count 7:	120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month Probation order, concurrent.

Total:  120 hours' Community Service Order and a 12 month probation Order and 2 years' disqualification from driving.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs ordered.

Roberto Miguel Andrade Rodrigues

First Indictment

1 count of:	Using a motor vehicle uninsured against third party risks, contrary to Article 2(1) of the Motor Traffic (Third Party Insurance)(Jersey) Law 1948, as amended (Count 7).
1 count of:	Driving whilst disqualified, contrary to Article 15(4) of the Road Traffic (Jersey) Law 1956 (Count 8).
1 count of:	Grave and criminal assault (Count 9).
1 count of:	Malicious damage (Count 10).

Age:  24.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

See Goggin above, First Indictment.

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas, remorse.

Previous Convictions:

8 previous convictions comprising 28 offences, including 1 assault in 2000 and 2 previous convictions for driving without insurance. 

Conclusions:

First Indictment

Count 7:	6 months' imprisonment plus 2 years' disqualification from driving.
Count 8:	3 months' imprisonment, concurrent.
Count 9:	18 months' imprisonment, consecutive.
Count 10:	1 month's imprisonment, concurrent.

Total:  2 years' imprisonment and 2 years' disqualification from driving.

Deportation order sought.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Once again, taking into account the time spent by Rodrigues in custody on remand together with mitigation, the Court ordered:-

First Indictment

Count 7:	240 hours' Community Service Order and 2 years' disqualification from driving.
Count 8:	240 hours' Community Service Order, concurrent.
Count 9:	240 hours' Community Service Order, concurrent.
Count 10:	240 hours' Community Service Order, concurrent.

Total:  240 hours' Community Service Order plus 2 years' disqualification from driving.

No Deportation order made.

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

Advocate S. A. Franckel for Goggin.

Advocate J. W. R. Bell for Rodrigues.

JUDGMENT

THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:

1.        Miss Goggin you have a very poor record and you have engaged in an amount of criminal offending here which is really not excusable.  You have reacted in a way, particularly when the police officers came around to arrest Mr Rodrigues, which was quite inexcusable.  The police officers are entitled to go about their business and I shall be saying the same thing in a moment to your former boyfriend. 

2.        The Court thinks that the Crown's conclusions in relation to the joint Indictment, the charges against you, and also in relation to the additional Indictment, are on the face of it, absolutely right and we would normally be looking to impose those sentences.  In particular, we would say in relation to the changing of a prescription that although it is clearly not as serious an offence as obtaining drugs to which you are not entitled, it is nonetheless an offence which you have committed on a number of occasions and justifies the conclusions which the Crown has moved for. 

3.        However, we have taken into account everything that your counsel has very ably said in mitigation for you and we have also taken into account the time which you have spent in custody and in particular, the fact that you are now a mother and the circumstances around your young child. 

4.        In the circumstances what we are going to do is to place you on probation for 1 year and it will be a condition of that probation order that you have drug and alcohol treatment at the same time.  We also sentence you to perform 120 hours' community service.  The sentence that we would have imposed, had the community service order not been imposed, would have been those sentences for which the Crown has moved, making a total of 15 months' youth detention.  In addition you will be disqualified from driving for 2 years. 

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

6.        Mr Rodrigues, assaulting a police officer and a grave and criminal assault on a police officer is extremely serious and merits a custodial sentence.  Your reaction was out of all proportion to the circumstances which you faced; you quite clearly lost complete control of yourself and there is no excuse for it whatsoever.  The police officers were performing their job and were entitled to act in the way that they did.  The kicks which you aimed could have caused serious injury and it is no credit to you that they did not, and a bite on the arm was also a part of that offence and it broke the skin which is serious.  The Court has also taken into account that the driving offences must have been committed intentionally and we emphasise that driving without insurance is a serious offence. 

7.        However, we have taken into account the fact that you have spent a considerable amount of time, 205 days so far, in custody and to some extent that reflects the seriousness of the assault on the police officer.

8.        The sentence which the Court is going to impose in relation to you is 240 hours' community service.  In relation to Count 7 you will also be disqualified from driving for a period of 2 years.  If we had not imposed a community service order we would have imposed 6 months' imprisonment on Count 7, 3 months' imprisonment, concurrent on count 8 and 12 months' imprisonment on Count 9, consecutive, which would have made a total of 18 months' imprisonment. 

9.        We are not going to make an order for deportation as we do not consider, on the facts of this case, that is it appropriate to consider deportation for these offences. 

Authorities

Criminal Justice (Young offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994.

Whelan on Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Court of Jersey.

Harrison-v-AG [2004] JLR 111.

AG-v-Vattier [2007] JRC 105.

AG-v-Ahier [2005] JRC 134.

Camacho-v-AG [2007] JCA 145.