Jersey Unreported Judgments

[2004]JRC121

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

9^th July, 2004

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Alexander Stevenson

 

 

1 count of:	Breaking and entering and larceny (Count 1).
1 count of:	Possession of a controlled Drug contrary to Article 6(1) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978 Count 2: cannabis resin
1 count of:	Obstructing police officer in execution of his duty (Count 3).

 

Age:     49.

 

Plea:    Guilty.

 

Details of Offence:

Count 1: Stevenson used a scaffold pole to smash the window of Hettich Jewellers Ltd; attack was in the early hours of the morning; three watches stolen, total value £2,249.  The laminated window cost £2,673; Hettich Jewellers Ltd lost business over the Christmas period, and for three months after, awaiting replacement armoured glass for window; watches remain unrecovered.

Count 2: Stevenson was arrested for drunk and disorderly and found to be in possession of a small amount of cannabis resin.

Count 3:  Whilst at the Accident and Emergency Department of the Hospital Stevenson refused to leave, insisting on being given a bed for the night; police called, Stevenson continued to refuse to leave; Accident and Emergency Department busy at the time; Stevenson making a considerable nuisance of himself.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Letter of remorse written, even though delivered two days before Royal Court appearance; some residual credit for guilty plea.

 

Previous Convictions:

Robbery.

Breaking and Entering with intent.

Importation of drugs.

Larceny.

Drunk and disorderly.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	2 years' imprisonment.
Count 2:	3 months' imprisonment.
Count 3:	2 months' imprisonment, all consecutive.

 

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

 

Count 1:	15 months' imprisonment.
Count 2:	1 month's imprisonment.
Count 3:	2 months' imprisonment, all consecutive.
Total:	18 months' imprisonment.

 

Defendant had bad record but pleaded guilty, even though credit was at the lower end of the concession.

 

R.G. Morris, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate C.M. Fogarty for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

 

THE COMMISSIONER:

1.        To discover someone smashing the re-enforced glass of Hettich Jewellers shop in the early hours of the morning must have been a disturbing experience.  Nevertheless, the police were called but Stevenson was no longer there. 

2.        He was found later that day selling 3 valuable stolen watches at the Great Union Hotel.  He was a regular customer there.  Stevenson was arrested but emphatically denied both incidents.  Later his DNA sample tied him ineluctably to the scaffolding pole with which he had smashed the window.

3.        He was later arrested for being drunk and it was then that the 249 milligrams of cannabis was found in his possession.  He still denied any involvement in the break-in. 

4.        Some days later he created a disturbance at the General Hospital having been released by the court on a warning.

5.        I have to say that you have a bad record and you are clearly not willing to admit to anything even when the evidence against you is overwhelming.  You did plead guilty which has some residual benefit, but certainly it must be at the lower end of the concession.  Again you have written a letter to Hettich but its lateness - it was only written a few days ago - does not over impress.

6.        The best thing that can be said in your defence - and Miss Fogarty has covered all the relevant points most adequately - is that despite your record you were out of prison and out of trouble for 3½ years.  The damage to Hettich's window was excessive although, of course, much of the damage will be covered by insurance.

7.        Both Counsel have referred us to features of the Probation Report which frankly we find puzzling in its conclusions.  We have considered the case of AG -v- Dring & McDonough (25^th October 199) Jersey Unreported [1991/156] and the other cases referred to us.  Perhaps this was an opportunist rather than a well planned break in to commercial premises, but unfortunately we cannot take the route suggested by counsel. 

8.        In the particular circumstances of this case we are going to slightly reduce the Crown's conclusions.  You are sentenced to 15 months' imprisonment on the first count, 1 month on the second account, and to 2 months' on the third count, all consecutive, that is a total of 18 months' imprisonment.    We order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

Whelan: Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey (2^nd Ed'n): pp. 64-7; 182-3.

AG -v- Gaffney (5^th June, 1995) Jersey Unreported; [1995/101].

AG -v- Dring & McDonough (25^th October 1991) Jersey Unreported; [1991/156]