Jersey Unreported Judgments

Superior Number Sentencing - drugs - importation - Class A.

[2012]JRC125

Royal Court

(Samedi)

28 June 2012

Before     :

J. A. Clyde-Smith, Esq., Commissioner, and Jurats Clapham, Le Cornu, Morgan, Kerley, Crill and Olsen.

The Attorney General

-v-

Kara Louise Nunes Pereira

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the accused was remanded by the Inferior Number on 20^th April, 2012, following a guilty plea to the following charges:

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 (Counts 1 and 2).

Age:18.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

On 20^th January, 2012, the defendant and her friend travelled to Liverpool.  During the weekend they socialised with two men known simply as "Chris" and "Daniel".  On 22^nd January, 2012, the two women flew back to Jersey.  They were stopped at the airport by a Customs Officer.  In response to questioning the defendant admitted to using cocaine over the weekend.  Her luggage was subject to an IONSCAN and gave a positive high reading for cocaine.  She was arrested and taken to the General Hospital for an x-ray.  Prior to being examined the defendant admitted, "I got something, I got something", she then produced three condoms each containing four plastic wrapped packages of heroin, and a further condom containing two packages of cocaine that she had concealed internally.  In total the defendant imported 80.6 grams of heroin and 13.4 grams of cocaine.  In interview the defendant admitted she had exchanged a number of telephone calls with "Daniel" but declined to give further details of him.  The defendant stated she was to have been paid £1,500.00 for her role in the importation.  She knew what she had been doing was illegal. 

Details of Mitigation:

Early guilty pleas, although these were viewed as inevitable given the circumstances of the offending.  No previous drugs convictions and youth. 

Previous Convictions:

13 offences for inter alia grave and criminal assaults, public order and fraud. 

Conclusions:

The Crown had regard to the serious nature of the offending and took a starting point of 10 years.  After having considered for the mitigation available to the defendant and the content of the background reports the Crown moved:-

Starting point 10 years' imprisonment.

Count 1:	5½ years' youth detention.
Count 2:	4 years' youth detention, concurrent.

Total: 5½ years' youth detention.

Forfeiture and destruction of drugs sought.  

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The defendant had imported two types of class A drugs with a combined weight of 94 grams.  The Court took into account the defendant's guilty plea, her youth and difficult upbringing, together with the content of the reports and letters before the Court.  Nonetheless the Court's strict sentencing policy was clear:-

Conclusions granted.

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

Advocate C. James for the Defendant.

JUDGMENT

THE commissioner:

1.        The defendant has pleaded guilty to importing 80.6 grams of heroin and 13.4 grams of cocaine into the Island concealed upon her internally.  The heroin would have had a wholesale price of £20,000 in Jersey and an estimated street value of £80,000.  The estimated street price of the cocaine would be in the region of £1,072.  She informed the police officer that her life directly prior to the offences was chaotic and she saw the opportunity of earning £1,500 for importing what she thought was £10,000 worth of cocaine as a way out and an opportunity to start afresh.  She has previous convictions but none for drugs but is assessed at a high risk of reoffending. 

2.        There were two types of drugs imported and we therefore have to apply the case of Valler-v-AG [2002] JLR 383 which determined that in fixing the starting point it is appropriate to increase the starting point for the most serious offence and impose a concurrent sentence for the lesser offence. It is right also to take into account the combined weight of the drugs imported by the defendant, which is 94 grams, which would put the defendant at the top end of the 50-100 gram bracket in the Rimmer guidelines which suggest a starting point of between 9 and 11 years. 

3.        The defendant, being 18, is subject to the provisions of Article 4(2) of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders)(Jersey) Law 1994 which provides that the Court will not pass a sentence of youth detention unless it appears that no other method of dealing with the defendant is appropriate because it appears to the Court that the totality of the offending is so serious that a non-custodial sentence cannot be justified.  The Crown submitted that this is the position here and that it seeks a starting point of 10 years.  Miss James for the defence argues that the starting point should be 9 years even after applying the Valler uplift.  We do not accept that as being correct.  We are prepared to agree that 9 years would be an acceptable appropriate starting point for the heroin alone, but an uplift must be applied to that as per Valler and we therefore agree with the Crown that 10 years is the correct starting point. 

4.        From that starting point the Crown have taken into account the defendant's youth, guilty pleas and the mitigation referred to in the reports and moves for a sentence of 5½ years in relation to the heroin and 4 years in relation to the cocaine, concurrent. 

5.        In terms of mitigation the most substantial mitigation available to the defendant is her youth; she is 18.  She has pleaded guilty but we have to say that she really had no alternative but to plead guilty, bearing in mind that drugs were found concealed internally upon her.  It is clear that she has suffered from emotional and material neglect from a young age and that has led to a complex range of psychological problems which need to be addressed.  We have considered your letter carefully that you have written to us, and the letter from your mother who is in Court and from others who are here, and it is a credit to you that you have so many people here supporting you on this day.  We have also taken into account the progress and constructive use you are making of your time in prison and we commend you on that and hope it will continue.  We have taken all of this mitigation into account but are left with the policy of the Court which is very clear.  Those who bring Class A drugs into the Island will face condign punishment.  We are aware of the misery that this drug trade causes to young people in particular and to families in Jersey.  The defendant is 18 and she knowingly embarked upon this importation for monetary gain, being well aware of the consequences and the policy of this Court. 

6.        The Crown has made a very substantial reduction in the starting point sentence to reflect the mitigation, the main point being your youth.  It gives us absolutely no pleasure at all in imposing a lengthy sentence on somebody so young but the policy is clear and we have reached the decision that the conclusions of the Crown are correct.

7.        On Count 1; 5½ years' youth detention, on Count 2; 4 years' youth detention, concurrent, making a total of 5½ years' youth detention.

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

Authorities

Valler-v-AG [2002] JLR 383.

Rimmer Lusk and Bade-v-AG [2001] JLR 373.

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

AG-v-Quinault and Haywood [2004] JRC 019