AG v Carrel

• Jurisdiction: Jersey
• Court: Royal Court
• Judge: Deputy Bailiff
• Judgment Date: 21 November 2003
• Neutral Citation: [2003] JRC 213
• Date: 21 November 2003

[2003] JRC 213

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

Before:

M.C. St. J. Birt, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Tibbo and King.

The Attorney General

and

David Philip Carrel

N.M. Santos Costa, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate M. Renouf for the Defendant.

Authorities

Wylie v A.G. (17th January, 2002) Jersey Unreported; [2002/13].

R v Webbe [2001] EWCA Crim. 1217.

1 count of: Receiving stolen property.

Age: 47.

Plea: Not guilty; convicted at criminal assize on 21 ^st October, 2003 and remanded to Inferior Number for sentencing.

Details of Offence:

Found guilty of being in possession of 148 CD's and DVD's to the value of £1,480.00.

Details of Mitigation:

Appalling record but nothing serious and no dishonesty since 1987. Alcoholic..

Previous Convictions:

7 Offences against person.

3 Offences against property.

48 Theft and kindred offences.

52 Miscellaneous offences.

1 firearms offence.

4 public order offences.

Conclusions:

15 months' imprisonment.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

210 hours' Community Service Order (based on his having kept out of trouble for a long time).

Deputy Bailiff

THE

1 Carrel, you have an appalling record of dishonesty and other offences but to your credit you have really managed to improve things to the extent that you have no conviction for any offence involving dishonesty since 1987. So it is all the more disappointing that you have now committed this offence of receiving 148 CDs and DVDs with a retail value of some £1,480.

2 We have been referred by counsel to the Jersey case of Wylie v A.G. (17th January, 2002) Jersey Unreported; [2002/13] and to the English case of R v Webbe [2001] EWCA Crim. 1217. Webbe appears to set out a number of guidelines. We agree that none of the aggravating features mentioned there are present and we do agree with the submission that this is towards the lower end of the scale of seriousness of offences of receiving.

3 Nevertheless the offence merits imprisonment and we would have sent you to prison were it not for the efforts that you have made since 1987 and we wish to encourage that and not send you back into your old ways for one failure. So we are going to impose a non-custodial sentence of community service.

4 We must therefore decide on what would have been the right prison sentence. Had you pleaded guilty we think the right sentence would have been nine months. We therefore agree with the Crown that on a not-guilty...