AG v Power

• Jurisdiction: Jersey
• Court: Royal Court
• Judge: The Deputy Bailiff
• Judgment Date: 25 March 2011
• Neutral Citation: [2011] JRC 65
• Date: 25 March 2011

[2011] JRC 65

ROYAL COURT

(Samedi Division)

Before:

W. J. Bailhache, Q.C., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Liddiard and Nicolle.

The Attorney General

and

James Christopher Power

J. C. Gollop, Esq., Crown Advocate.

Advocate D. P. Le Maistre for the Defendant.

Authorities

AG -v- Power [2009] JRC 059.

AG -v- Power [2009] JRC 247.

AG -v- Da Silva 1997/218.

AG -v- Allo and Collins (1983) JJ 85.

AG -v- Moreira [2003] JRC 083 A.

Sentencing by the Inferior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charges:

2 counts of: Breaking and entry and larceny (Counts 1 and 2).

Age : 25.

Plea: Guilty.

Details of Offence:

Count 1

Damage caused to the front door to gain entry to a flat during the day when it was unoccupied and goods to the value of approximately £1,400 were stolen. An untidy search conducted of the flat. Items included a home computer and the cables had been cut. It contained a large quantity of personal material including thousands of photographs which the owner had stored as part of his hobby as an amateur photographer, which he also taught part-time. The photographs and other material were irreplaceable. The offence had impacted upon the owner and a Victim Personal Statement was provided to the Court.

Count 2

Three weeks after the first offence the defendant broke into his mother's home by smashing a window to gain entry. He stole US$29 which was recovered on him at the time of arrest.

When interviewed for the above offences he had little recollection of breaking and entry into his mother's home but thought she would not mind. He was going to use the dollars to buy alcohol/drugs. Denied all involvement in the first offence but was unable to explain how his fingerprints had been found on a camera box located at that address. The camera was one of the items stolen.

The Crown relied upon the case of AG -v- Da Silva and AG -v- Moreira and considered that there were a number of aggravating factors justifying an increased sentence. Those aggravating factors were:-

(1) Serial offences.

(2) None of the property recovered in relation to Count 1.

(3) Defendant had previous convictions.

(4) Violence and vandalism used to gain entry.

(5) Distress caused to victim on Count 1.

Details of Mitigation:

The Crown

Only factor of substance was his guilty plea entered on second occasion before the Magistrate's Court. Did not have the benefit of youth or good character; had a total of twelve convictions for thirty-five offences of which nineteen were offences of dishonesty. Had been given opportunities by the Court in the past. Assessed as being at high risk of re-offending.

Defence

Still a young person whose life had been blighted by drugs. Had spent a fifth of his life in prison. He had not been able to take advantage of the chances previously given. Mother remained supportive. He was a talented artist. Letter of apology. Significant change in his life was the relationship with his fiancée. He claimed he had been involved in the first offence to clear off a drug debt. Early guilty pleas.

Previous Convictions:

Twelve convictions for thirty-five offences including nineteen for dishonesty including five for breaking and entry and larceny, possession of controlled drugs x 3, robbery and motoring offences.

Conclusions:

Count 1: 3 years' imprisonment.

Count 2: 3 years' imprisonment, concurrent.

Total: 3 years' imprisonment.

Sentence and Observations of Court:

The defendant to be sentenced for two counts of breaking and entry and larceny. Stole a quantity of equipment from the first property which had not been recovered and second offence involved the breaking and entry into the mother's home and the stealing of US$29 which was recovered. It has been said before by this Court many times before that...