[2004]JRC027

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

 

12^th February 2004

 

 

The Attorney General

-v-

Paul James Mohammed

 

Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the Defendant was remanded by the Inferior Number on 5th December, 2003, following a guilty plea to:

 

3 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. Count 1:  Diamorphine. Count 2:  cannabis resin. Count 3:  diazepam

 

Breach of a Young Offender’s Licence, following the Defendant’s release from custody on completion of a 20 month’s Youth Detention sentence, imposed by the Royal Court on 30^th October, 2002 [2002/207].

 

Age:     22

 

Details of Offence:

Paul Mohammed travelled to Jersey on the return portion of a flight to London Gatwick Airport, having travelled to London approximately two days before with approximately £750 - £800 in cash.  At sometime before his return flight he had acquired heroin, cannabis and diazepam from an unnamed source.  Prior to travelling on his return flight he concealed the drugs in different ways.  He did this in an attempt to avoid detection by customs.  The heroin was secreted internally.  The cannabis and 7 diazepam tablets were hidden upon his person.  The remainder of the diazepam was hidden within a wash bag in his luggage.  Mohammed was arrested at the airport after customs officers were tipped off as to what flight he was on.  He attempted to dispose of the cannabis and was arrested.  A search of Mohammed’s person was negative.  X-rays revealed the presence of suspicious objects in his lower bowel.  Mohammed stated that he had one package of gear inside him, which he produced.  A further x-ray showed a second package which he eventually produced. 

Quantities: 

i)          1.79 grammes of cannabis resin.

ii)          435 milligrams of cannabis oil.

iii)         175 Diazepam tablets.

iv)         47.18 grammes of heroin.

Key factors:

i)          amount, type and quantity of drugs.

ii)          commercial amount of heroin.

 

Details of Mitigation:

Guilty pleas.  Amount of cannabis and diazepam consistent with personal use.  Courier.  22, single.  Unemployed.  Used to work until he sustained a knee injury as a result of an attack by those in the drugs trade.  Offence prompted by pressure from those in the drugs trade and desire to pay off debts.  Heroin addict.  Matters generally outlined in Social Security Report.

 

Previous Convictions:

Numerous drugs related previous convictions, whether they were possession or offences of larceny committed to obtain funds.  Served a period in youth custody.  The offence committed whilst on licence and in breach of licence.

 

Conclusions:

 

Count 1:	5 years’ imprisonment.
Count 2:	1 month’s imprisonment.
Count 3:	1 month’s imprisonment.

 

9 years’ starting point. 

No order sought re breach of Young Offender’s Licence.

 

Sentence and Observations of Court:

Conclusions granted.

Mohammed is sentenced for the importation of just over 47 grams of heroin with a wholesale value of between £7,200 and £9,600.  This was concealed internally.  He also imported personal amounts of cannabis and diazepam.  He was the courier of a significant amount of heroin.  In breach of youth offenders licence.  5 previous convictions for drugs offences.  Court agrees the Crown’s starting point.  The injury suffered was an almost inevitable consequence of involvement in the dirty trade in drugs.  It is one of the reasons Court imposes severe sentences.  Court has studied the reports before it.  Mohammed has co-operated.  He pleaded guilty and has the mitigation of youth.

 

 

S.M.. Baker, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate Mrs S.A. Pearmain for the Defendant.

 

 

 

JUDGMENT

 

 

THE BAILIFF:

1.        Mohammed is to be sentenced for the importation of 47 grams of heroin with an estimated wholesale value of between £7,200 and £9,600.  The heroin was concealed internally.  He also imported a small quantity of cannabis resin and diazepam which were of minimal value, however, and for his personal use.

2.        Mohammed was in short a courier of a significant quantity of heroin.  Furthermore, he was in breach of the licence to which he was subject as the result of the Criminal Justice (Young Offenders) (Jersey) Law 1994 and a conviction in 2002.  He has five previous convictions for drug offences.  The Crown Advocate has taken a starting point of 9 years’ imprisonment, having regard to the guideline cases, and we agree that that starting point is correct.

3.        In mitigation defence counsel has drawn our attention to an injury suffered by the Defendant at the hands of his suppliers, as a result of which, it is said, he was intimidated into carrying out this drugs run.  Unfortunately, Mohammed did not inform the police at the time of this alleged assault.  Sadly, this kind of violence and intimidation is the inevitable concomitant of the dirty trade in drugs.  It is one of the reasons why the Court adopts a policy of severe sentences for those who involve themselves in drug trafficking. 

4.        The Court has studied carefully the reports made available to it.  In mitigation the defendant has co-operated and pleaded guilty to the indictment.  In addition he has the mitigation of youth available to him. 

5.        The Crown Advocate has made an allowance of 4 years in respect of those mitigating circumstances and again, we think, that allowance, is correct.  The conclusions are granted.  We hope that after your release you will break loose from the spiral into which you have descended and that you will give up the abuse of drugs which has led to your being incarcerated in this way.

6.        The sentence of the Court is that on count 1, you will be sentenced to 5 years’ imprisonment; on count 2, to 1 month’s imprisonment, concurrent; and count 3, 1 month’s imprisonment, concurrent; making a total of 5 years’ imprisonment, and we order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs.

Authorities

Rimmer & Ors –v- A.G. [2001]JLR373.

Valler –v- A.G. [2002]JLR383.

Whelan: Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey (2^nd Ed’n): pp. 6- 29.

Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978: Article 29.

A.G. –v- Quinault and Haywood [2004]JRC019.

A.G. –v- Harris [2003]JRC068.

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