Jersey Judgment

AG -v- Ahier [2015] JRC 072 (13 April 2015)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

Given the defendant's poor record, high risk of reoffending, and disregard of previous clear warnings, a total sentence of 4 years' imprisonment is justified for the offences committed.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • Imprisonment: 1 year on Count 1 (illegal entry and larceny)
  • Imprisonment: 3 years on Count 2 (breaking and entry and larceny)
  • Imprisonment: 6 months on Count 3 (breaking and entry and larceny)
  • Imprisonment: 3 months on Count 4 (malicious damage)
  • Imprisonment: 1 month on Count 5 (possession of morphine)
  • Imprisonment: 1 month on Count 6 (possession of cannabis resin)
  • Counts 1 and 2 to run consecutively, others concurrently
  • Total sentence: 4 years' imprisonment
  • Forfeiture and destruction of drugs

02

Material facts

Parties

[Defendant Name Not Provided]

Defendant Counsel: [Counsel Name Not Provided]

Attorney General

Prosecutor Counsel: [Crown Advocate Name Not Provided]

Amounts and remedies

  • Total Imprisonment: years 4
  • Imprisonment on Count 1: years 1
  • Imprisonment on Count 2: years 3
  • Imprisonment on Count 3: years 0.5
  • Imprisonment on Count 4: years 0.25
  • Imprisonment on Count 5: years 0.083
  • Imprisonment on Count 6: years 0.083

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal / Sentencing

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Counsel advanced all possible arguments on behalf of the defendant, including reference to personal challenges and recent loss.
Respondent
The Crown submitted that a substantial prison sentence was inevitable given the defendant's record, high risk of reoffending, and previous clear warnings.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Judgment

    Breaking and entry of a dwelling is a crime against the person due to the distress caused, not just a crime against property.

  2. 02

    Judgment

    Repeat offending after prior warnings justifies a substantial increase in sentence.

  3. 03

    Judgment

    Forfeiture and destruction of controlled drugs is appropriate upon conviction for possession.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

Given the defendant's poor record, high risk of reoffending, and disregard of previous clear warnings, a total sentence of 4 years' imprisonment is justified for the offences committed.

Obiter and limits

  • The Court has tried every form of disposal to help the defendant address issues and offending.
  • Breaking and entry is not simply a crime against property but also against the person due to distress caused.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

  • Imprisonment: 1 year on Count 1 (illegal entry and larceny)
  • Imprisonment: 3 years on Count 2 (breaking and entry and larceny)
  • Imprisonment: 6 months on Count 3 (breaking and entry and larceny)
  • Imprisonment: 3 months on Count 4 (malicious damage)
  • Imprisonment: 1 month on Count 5 (possession of morphine)
  • Imprisonment: 1 month on Count 6 (possession of cannabis resin)
  • Counts 1 and 2 to run consecutively, others concurrently
  • Total sentence: 4 years' imprisonment
  • Forfeiture and destruction of drugs

Source and reliance status

Official court record

This page organises the available record for research. Confirm quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the official source before relying on the case.

Judgment reading view

Judgment text

The complete available source text.

Source document

Court record

Judgment

[2015] JRC 072

JUDGMENT THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: 1. You are here to be sentenced on an Indictment which contains one count of illegal entry and larceny, two counts of breaking and entry and larceny, one count of malicious damage and two counts of possession of controlled drugs, namely morphine and cannabis resin. All offending took place on the same day except the single count of illegal entry and larceny which took place two days earlier.

2. You have a poor record. When you were last before this Court in March 2013 ( AG-v-Ahier [2013] JRC 055 ) you received a total of 3 years' imprisonment for offending that also included two counts of breaking and entry and larceny. On that occasion the Court warned you in these terms:- "Things are only going to get worse for you if you continue like this. It is time that you realised that. We recognise from the background reports that you have had your own difficulties. We urge you to use your time in prison constructively because if you continue along this path the sentences which are imposed by this Court are likely to get only higher." 3. That was a warning in the clearest possible terms. We recognise that you have had challenges and difficulties in your life, including your recent loss. But the Court has tried every form of disposal to help you address your issues and offending, yet you offended only five weeks after being released from prison.

4. Breaking and entry of a dwelling is not simply a crime against property, it is a crime against the person because of the distress it almost inevitably causes. You are said also to be at high risk of reoffending and a substantial prison sentence is inevitable, as indeed you yourself recognise.

5. We have considered carefully all that has been said on your behalf and your counsel has advanced every argument that he possibly could. But, particularly in the light of the previous warning that has been so clearly given, the Court sees no basis for departing from the conclusion of the Crown.

6. Accordingly, on Count 1 you are sentenced to 1 year's imprisonment, on Count 2; 3 years' imprisonment, on Count 3; 6 months' imprisonment, Count 4; 3 months' imprisonment, Count 5; 1 month's imprisonment, Count 6; 1 month's imprisonment, the sentences on Counts 1 and 2 to run consecutive and all others concurrently. Therefore you are sentenced to a total period of 4 years' imprisonment.

7. We also order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs. Authorities Whelan on Aspects of Sentencing in the Superior Courts of Jersey, 3rd Edition. AG v Da Silva 1997/218. AG v Moreira [2003] JRC 083A . AG v Wylie [2006] JRC 026 . AG-v-Ahier [2013] JRC 055 . Page Last Updated: 24 Jan 2018 BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII

Source wording is retained. Consult the source document for its original formatting and pagination.

Authorities

Authorities used by the court

Cases, legislation, regulations, and constitutional provisions identified in the available record.

AG-v-Ahier [2013] JRC 055

Case cited

AG v Da Silva 1997/218

Case cited

AG v Moreira [2003] JRC 083A

Case cited

AG v Wylie [2006] JRC 026

Case cited

Case-aware research

Ask AI about this case

The judgment and available research above are public. New questions open in a separate private conversation grounded in this case.

About this LexChat collection

This page organizes the available case record for research. Verify quotations, current status, and subsequent treatment against the source document. Corrections can be reported to hello@esheria.ai.

Legal information, not legal advice. Research summaries do not replace the judgment.