AG v Boschat [2023] JRC 007 (13 January 2023)
- Citation
- [2023] JRC 007
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing Judgment
More details
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing Judgment
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The defendant supplied at least a kilogram of cannabis for profit over a prolonged period, failed to cooperate with police, and was convicted of three counts: possession of criminal property, supply of cannabis, and failure to disclose a PIN. The seriousness of the offences, commercial motivation, lack of cooperation, and prior record warranted a total sentence of 2 years and 3 months' imprisonment, with a confiscation order and forfeiture of the mobile phone.
Court disposition
convicted and sentenced
Orders
- 18 months' imprisonment on Count 1 (possession of criminal property)
- 18 months' imprisonment on Count 2 (supply of cannabis), concurrent
- 9 months' imprisonment on Count 3 (failure to disclose PIN), consecutive
- Total sentence: 2 years and 3 months' imprisonment
- Confiscation order granted
- Forfeiture and destruction of mobile telephone
02
Material facts
Parties
Simon Boschat
DefendantCrown
ProsecutionAmounts and remedies
- Minimum Street Value of Cannabis Supplied: GBP 23,000
- Criminal Property Received (count 1): GBP 19,000
- Total Imprisonment (months): months 27
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Sentencing Judgment
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
Extent and seriousness of commercial cannabis supply
- 02
Possession of criminal property derived from drug trafficking
- 03
Failure to comply with notice requiring disclosure of a key (PIN)
- 04
Appropriate sentencing for each count
Party arguments
- Applicant
- Mitigation included reference to lack of legal representation before the Magistrate, technical issues with QR code, and positive references including a job offer upon release. Plea entered to Count 3 before the Magistrate. Counsel argued for attention to parity with sentence imposed on Mr Le Jehan.
- Respondent
- Crown submitted that the defendant supplied at least a kilogram of cannabis for profit, failed to cooperate with police, and that the starting point for sentencing should reflect the seriousness and commercial nature of the offences. Crown referenced AG v Goodwin and other authorities for sentencing guidance.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
AG v Goodwin [2016] JRC 165
Sentences for commercial supply of cannabis must reflect seriousness and role in supply chain.
- 02
General sentencing practice
Consecutive custodial sentences are appropriate for failure to comply with disclosure notices except in exceptional circumstances.
- 03
AG v Davies [2022] JRC 107
Starting points for criminal property offences may be higher where sums involved are substantial.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The defendant supplied at least a kilogram of cannabis for profit over a prolonged period, failed to cooperate with police, and was convicted of three counts: possession of criminal property, supply of cannabis, and failure to disclose a PIN. The seriousness of the offences, commercial motivation, lack of cooperation, and prior record warranted a total sentence of 2 years and 3 months' imprisonment, with a confiscation order and forfeiture of the mobile phone.
Obiter and limits
- The Court is impressed by the defendant's references and job offer upon release.
- The offences were not complicated and the defendant knew he was guilty when charged.
- The Court hopes not to see the defendant again.
Court disposition
convicted and sentenced
- 18 months' imprisonment on Count 1 (possession of criminal property)
- 18 months' imprisonment on Count 2 (supply of cannabis), concurrent
- 9 months' imprisonment on Count 3 (failure to disclose PIN), consecutive
- Total sentence: 2 years and 3 months' imprisonment
- Confiscation order granted
- Forfeiture and destruction of mobile telephone
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.
Court record
Judgment
JUDGMENT THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: 1. Simon Boschat, you are 33 years old. Between April 2020 and February 2021, you supplied another man, who has since been sentenced by this Court, with substantial amounts of cannabis and on one occasion agreed to supply him with half a kilogram. In total you supplied, or agreed to supply, at least a kilogram of cannabis. You supplied the cannabis at various prices, often £15 per gram, so that you could make a profit on the supplies.
2. In one message, which we do not hold against you, you boasted that you had in fact been supplying cannabis for several years. You gave advice to the person you were supplying as to how to maximise his profits from the drugs you were distributing to him. You played a crucial role in the chain of supply and without you and people like you the illegal trade in drugs like cannabis would not be able to flourish.
3. The minimum street value of the cannabis you supplied or agreed to supply is in excess of £23,000 and you were, on the evidence that we have seen, dealing in order to supplement your other income from legitimate sources. When you were arrested, you gave the police little assistance and, in particular, you refused to provide access to your iPhone, even when served with a notice requiring you to do so. You deliberately refused to provide your PIN number and the Court will in this case and most cases draw the inference that that was solely to prevent the police of learning of your criminal conduct which, in fact, was proved by the download from a telephone belonging to the person that you were supplying.
4. Count 1 on the Indictment represents the £19,000, or thereabouts that you received from your criminal conduct and we have had regard to the Crown's conclusions and their reference to the factors set out in AG v Goodwin [2016] JRC 165 and agree with that analysis as does your counsel today.
5. We note that Mr Le Jehan, whom you supplied, was sentenced to 16 months' imprisonment for offences relating to the supply of cannabis and the possession of criminal property. The offences he committed were, in many respects, less serious than those that you face today. He was lower down the chain of supply and the criminal property he possessed was far less and we note that he co-operated with the police, providing them with his PIN number.
6. You supplied cannabis on a commercial basis over a long period and did not assist the authorities, with the exception of entering your guilty pleas.
7. You receive full credit for your plea to Count 3 which you entered before the Magistrate at the end of September last year. Count 3 is the offence of failing to comply with a notice requiring disclosure of a key. You did not enter pleas in respect of Counts 1 and 2 on the Indictment before the Magistrate and to receive full credit guilty pleas must be entered in the Magistrate's Court, save in exceptional circumstances.
8. It is said that you were unrepresented before the Magistrate, which is right, but you had been charged with these offences three weeks before and had not in that period obtained legal advice. It was referenced in mitigation on your behalf to a QR code at the Magistrate's Court not working but you had three weeks in which to obtain legal advice, and had you done so you would have known, if you did not know, that relevant prosecution papers would have been available to you or your Advocate from the Criminal Justice Unit at the police station including, we are told, nine statements of evidence, 12 exhibits, the charge sheet, the police report and your interview. In any event these were not complicated offences. You knew when you were charged that you were guilty of having in your possession criminal property, as alleged, and you knew that you had been dealing in cannabis, as alleged, and indeed these were identical offences to those of which Mr Le Jehan was convicted and to which your counsel has said we should pay close attention today.
9. We agree that in relation to the offence of not supplying your PIN, there must be a consecutive sentence and in all but the most exceptional circumstances, a consecutive custodial sentence will be passed for such an offence.
10. You have a bad record and you are at high risk of re-conviction, according to the author of the Pre-Sentence Report.
11. We have considered the letters; we have considered the letter from you; the other references and we are impressed and pleased to see that a job with be available to you on your release from custody.
12. In relation to starting points we broadly agree with the Crown's assessment of the starting point at Count 2. In relation to Count 1 we think arguably that the starting point might have been significantly higher and we see from the case of AG v Davies [2022] JRC 107 that the sum of £23,000 criminal property led to the Court proceeding on the basis of a staring point well in excess of 3 years.
13. The sentences we impose are as follows:- (i) Count 1, 18 months' imprisonment (ii) Count 2, 18 months' imprisonment, concurrent (iii) Count 3, 9 months' imprisonment, consecutive making a total of 2 years and 3 months' imprisonment. We hope, in accordance with your letter, that the Court will not see you again.
14. We make the Confiscation Order sought.
15. We order the forfeiture and destruction of the mobile telephone. Authorities AG v Goodwin [2016] JRC 165 . AG v Davies [2022] JRC 107 . AG v Fish and Hinds [2016] JRC 181A AG v Bhojwani [2010] JRC 116 AG v Le Jehan [2022] JRC 045 AG v Reece [2022] JRC 151 Campbell v AG [1995] JLR 136 AG v Thurban et al [2020] JRC 212 AG v Bennett [2021] JRC 261 AG v Ferguson, Morgan and Saunders [2022] JRC102 AG v Goncalves [2022] JRC 097 Page Last Updated: 26 Jan 2023 Back to top About JLIB Accessibility Contacts Disclaimer Feedback Privacy policy Site map © Jersey Legal Information Board 2001- This website is not compatible with your web browser. You should install a newer browser . If you live in Jersey and need help upgrading call the States of Jersey web team on 440099. BAILII: Copyright Policy | Disclaimers | Privacy Policy | Feedback | Donate to BAILII
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.