Mooney and Sumner v AG

JurisdictionJersey
CourtCourt of Appeal
JudgeCarey JA
Judgment Date02 March 2005
Neutral Citation[2005] JCA 23
Date02 March 2005

[2005] JCA 23

COURT OF APPEAL

Before:

R.C. Southwell, Esq., Q.C., President; Sir de Vic Carey and The Hon. Lord Hodge

Kevin Philip Patrick Mooney;
Scott Andrew McLean Sumner
and
The Attorney General

Advocate J. Bell for Kevin Philip Patrick Mooney;

Advocate L.J Springate for Scott Andrew McLean Sumner;

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

Authorities.

Bonnar and Noon v AG [ 2001 JLR 626].

Campbell, Molloy and MacKenzie v AG [ 1995 JLR 136].

Valler v AG (18th July, 2002) Jersey Unreported; [2002/133].

Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law 1978: Article 61.

Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978: Articles 5 and 6.

Le Pavoux v Attorney General [2003] JCA 127.

Attorney General v Antunes & Others [ 2003 JLR 144].

Wright v Attorney General [12th July, 1999] Jersey Unreported; [1999/125].

Rayner v AG (25th September, 1996) Jersey Unreported [1996/171].

Bevan v Attorney General [2003] JCA 014.

Harrison v Attorney General [2004] JCA 046.

R v Fawcett (1983) 5 Cr.App. R. (S) 158.

R v Rugg [1997] 2 Cr. App. R. (S.) 350.

AG v Kendrick and Ors [2004] JRC 187

Appeal Kevin Philip Patrick Mooney against a total sentence of 8 years' imprisonment passed on 1st November, 2004, by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the Appellant was remanded by the Inferior Number on 9th July, 2004, on a guilty plea to:

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) of the Customs and Excise (Jersey) Law, 1998:

count 1: MDMA, on which count a sentence of 8 years' imprisonment was passed.

count 2: cannabis resin, on which count a sentence of 8 years' imprisonment, concurrent, was passed.

Leave to appeal was granted by the Bailiff on 7th January, 2005.

Appeal of Scott Andrew McLean Sumner against a total sentence of 2 years' imprisonment passed on 1st November, 2004, by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, to which the Appellant was remanded by the Inferior Number on 10th September, 2004, on a guilty plea to:

2 counts of: being knowingly concerned in the supplying of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5[c] of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978:

count 3: MDMA, on which count a sentence of 2 years' imprisonment was passed.

count 4: cannabis resin, on which count a sentence of 2 years' imprisonment, concurrent, was passed.

1 count of: possession of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 6(1) of the Misuse of drugs (Jersey) Law, 1978:

count 5: cannabis resin, on which count a sentence of 1 month's imprisonment, concurrent, was passed.

Leave to appeal was granted by the Bailiff on 7th January, 2005.

[The other co-defendants named in the indictment have not appealed.]

Carey JA
1

This is the judgment of the Court in respect of appeals against sentence imposed by the Superior Number of the Royal Court on 1st November, 2004. The two Appellants were sentenced with two other persons who are not currently appealing. Leave to appeal was granted by the learned Bailiff on the 7th January, 2005. Although the grounds upon which the Appellants are appealing are separate and distinct it is convenient to deal with these appeals together as it is necessary to describe in some detail the factual background.

2

The Appellant Mooney pleaded guilty to two Counts on an indictment charging him, Sumner and two men called Kendrick and Ayers respectively with being concerned in the fraudulent evasion of the prohibition on the importation of controlled drugs, namely in the First Count 3,875 ecstasy or MDMA tablets and in the Second Count 29 1/2 kilograms of cannabis resin. Mooney and Kendrick pleaded guilty. Ayers was convicted after a trial. Sumner pleaded not guilty to these two Counts but guilty to two alternative Counts of supplying MDMA and cannabis resin, as well as a further Count of simple possession of a small quantity of cannabis resin. These pleas were accepted.

3

We now turn to the details of the offences and adopt the following summary from the report of the Royal Court Hearing) ( AG v Kendrick and Ors [2004] JRC 187):

“Kendrick drove a car containing a little under 29 1/2 kilos of cannabis resin and 3,875 ecstasy tablets onto a ferry going to Jersey. The car had been modified to allow the drugs to be carried in the front and rear bumpers. He telephoned Ayers, who was then in Liverpool, both before boarding and after disembarking from the ferry. After speaking to Kendrick upon his arrival in Jersey, Ayers telephoned Mooney in Jersey. Upon disembarking from the ferry, Kendrick drove the car to the Monterey Hotel in St Helier. Shortly afterwards, Mooney went to the Hotel de France and made a booking for Ayers to stay the following night under a false name. Later the same evening Kendrick telephoned Ayers and confirmed that Ayers was travelling to Jersey the next day. Several minutes later, Sumner and Mooney arrived at the Monterey Hotel. Mooney went into the hotel and a few minutes later he and Kendrick came back out. They became engaged in animated conversation and on one occasion looked in Kendrick's car boot. Kendrick returned to the hotel. Mooney and Sumner got into Kendrick's car and Sumner drove it to Mooney's home. It was during this car journey that Mooney told Sumner for the first time that the car contained drugs. The car stopped and Sumner got out. Shortly later, he got back in again and continued the journey as intended. When they arrived at Mooney's home, Sumner's Switch card and e-mail address were used to book a flight over the internet for Ayers to travel from Birmingham to Jersey the next morning. Mooney telephoned Ayers to tell him that this travel booking had been made on his behalf. A little later, around 10.00 pm, Mooney went out. He came back with a bag containing over £62,000 in cash. The next morning, Ayers arrived in Jersey. He made his way to Mooney's address. All defendants were arrested shortly thereafter.

Following Sumner's arrest, his home address was searched. A small piece of cannabis resin weighing 253 milligrams was discovered.”

4

It would appear from the above summary that these offenders were only detected as a result of a painstaking surveillance operation mounted by the law enforcement authorities. So far as the involvement of Mooney is concerned the Crown Advocate said this about him:

“Mooney was responsible for the Jersey end of this importation. The prosecution put Mooney immediately below Ayers in the chain of importation…”

He goes on:

“Kendrick was the courier; Ayers and Mooney were responsible for the importation.”

So far as Sumner is concerned the Crown Advocate said:

“Sumner lies at the bottom end of this offending. This was not a premeditated offence by him. He was told of the presence of the drugs on the Monday while he was on the way to Mooney's house with Mooney and, as such, he was removed from the source of supply.”.

The Sentences
5

The Crown set a starting point of 16 years for Ayers, which was reduced by the Royal Court to 15 years. Similar reductions were made by the Court to the proposed starting points for Kendrick and Mooney resulting in Kendrick having a starting point of 13 years and Mooney having a starting point of 14 years. Ayers, as we have noted, pleaded not guilty, but the Crown only asked for a sentence of 6 years concurrent on each Count and despite reducing the starting point the Court upheld that conclusion. Kendrick was sentenced to seven years concurrent on each Count and Mooney to eight years concurrent on each Count; in each case this was one year less than the finishing point suggested by the Crown.

6

In the case of Sumner the Crown proposed a starting point of seven years. His criminality was assessed by the Deputy Bailiff on the basis of his involvement being very little. It involved firstly continuing to drive the imported car after he had discovered that there were drugs in the car, and secondly allowing his credit card to be used for booking Ayers' flight from England. There were six Jurats sitting with the learned Deputy Bailiff — three were persuaded that for the Appellant Sumner exceptionally a non-custodial sentence of probation and 240 hours community service was appropriate. The other three considered that two years imprisonment was required because of the seriousness of the supply of this quantity of drugs and the need to make it clear that even a small degree of involvement was likely to result in custody where this amount of drugs is being supplied. The learned Deputy Bailiff, to whose views as to sentence no more or no less weight must be given than those of the individual Jurats who sit with him, agreed with the views of the Jurats who were of the latter view, and so a sentence of two years' imprisonment was imposed.

The Appellants' cases
7

The flavour of the somewhat different cases being put forward by the Advocates for the Appellants can be gleaned from the summary that we have related of the Crown's conclusions and the sentences handed down.

The case of Mooney
8

Mr. Bell at the original trial emphasised...

To continue reading

Request your trial
2 cases
  • AG v Gregory Gregory and Raffray
    • Jersey
    • Royal Court
    • 14 April 2005
    ...[2000/42]. A.G. v Miah (Aklas) (4th November, 2002) Jersey Unreported; [2002/210]. A.G. v Miah (Mohammed) [2004] JRC 048. Mooney and Sumner v A.G. [2005] JCA 023. Campbell & Ors [ 1995 JLR 136]. Rimmer & Ors [ 2001 JLR 373]. A.G. v Raffray (20th July 1995) Jersey Unreported; [1995/140]. Fo......
  • Gregory & Raffray v A.G.
    • Jersey
    • Court of Appeal
    • 6 July 2005
    ...General Advocate D. Steenson for E.A. Gregory Advocate R. Juste for D.C. Raffray C.M.M. Yates, Esq., Crown Advocate Authorities Mooney and Sumner v A.G. [2005] JCA 023. Rimmer Lusk & Bade v A.G. [2001] JLR 373. Whitehouse v A.G. [2002] JCA 134. Application for leave to appeal against sent......

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT