BAILII is celebrating 24 years of free online access to the law! Would you consider making a contribution?
No donation is too small. If every visitor before 31 December gives just £5, it will have a significant impact on BAILII's ability to continue providing free access to the law.
Thank you very much for your support!
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] | ||
Jersey Unreported Judgments |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> AG -v- Ozard [2016] JRC 166B (16 September 2016) URL: http://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2016/2016_166B.html Cite as: [2016] JRC 166B |
[New search] [Help]
Inferior Number Sentencing - breaking and entering with intent to commit a crime.
Before : |
T. J. Le Cocq, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Fisher and Pitman |
The Attorney General
-v-
Dean Jones Ozard
Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charge:
1 count of: |
Breaking and entering with intent to commit a crime (Count 1). |
Age: 34.
Plea: Guilty.
Details of Offence:
At approximately 01:25 hours on Sunday 5th June, 2016, the defendant was captured on CCTV in the alleyway behind Kleinwort Benson offices in West Centre. The defendant can be seen walking around the rear of the building trying to open various windows.
At 02:00 hours a security officer was notified of an alarm at the Kleinwort Benson offices. On entering the premises the security officer deactivated the alarm and checked the premises. He discovered the defendant at the end of a corridor attempting to hide behind some boxes. The security officer approached the defendant and asked him what he was doing in the building. The defendant replied that this was his friend's flat and that he was there with his friend. The security officer restrained the defendant and a scuffle ensued during which the security officer suffered a small injury to his face. The security officer called the police and the defendant was arrested.
Police then conducted a search of the internal and external areas. It was noted that one of the windows in an office at the rear of the premises (overlooking the alleyway where the defendant had been caught on CCTV) had been smashed and that broken glass was spread on the floor of the office itself. Forensic analysis was carried out on a baked bean tin and bottle of water found in the offices, fingerprints on the baked bean tin were identified as belonging to the defendant.
Details of Mitigation:
Guilty plea.
Previous Convictions:
16 previous convictions comprising 51 offences, these include 27 theft and kindred offences, many of which are similar break and entries.
Conclusions:
Count 1: |
18 months' imprisonment. |
Sentence and Observations of Court:
Count 1: |
12 months' imprisonment. |
C. M. M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate.
Advocate F. Ford for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. You are to be sentenced today for one count of breaking and entering with intent to commit a crime. We do not need to set out the details, suffice to say that you broke into commercial premises at night that you were heavily under the influence of alcohol to the extent that you remember little about it. It could have been a dangerous situation in that you were confronted by a security guard and you scuffled with him.
2. You have a very poor record although there is nothing recent of particular note. You have the benefit of your guilty plea, for which we allow you full credit, and we have read the letters put forward on your behalf which speak well of you, and we note the contents of the social enquiry report which we have, of course, taken into account. But the simple seriousness of this offence is reflected in the fact that it was a break in at night to premises, and that you did scuffle with a security guard as a result of which he sustained a minor injury. That is something that the Court has said it must take into account in assessing seriousness and to protect security guards from carrying out their lawful duties.
3. It seems to us that we cannot in this case avoid a custodial sentence but, in the light of all of the mitigation, we feel able to reduce the Crown's conclusions somewhat and we sentence you to a period of 12 months' imprisonment.