Jersey Judgment

AG -v- Dobson [2011] JRC 197 (05 October 2011)

On this page

Professional case brief

Research organized from the available case record

Source document

01

Holding and result

The defendant imported and possessed Class A drugs with intent to distribute, and sentencing policy requires a starting point of 10 years' imprisonment, reduced for mitigation to 5½ years.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • 5½ years' imprisonment
  • forfeiture and destruction of the drugs

02

Material facts

Parties

Mr Dobson

Defendant

Crown

Prosecution

Amounts and remedies

  • Weight of Cocaine: 97.66

03

Procedural history

  1. Posture

    Criminal / Sentencing

04

Questions and positions

Legal issues

Party arguments

Applicant
Mitigation based on early guilty plea, remorse, no previous convictions, and other personal circumstances. Suggested reduction in starting point due to relatively low street value of cocaine compared to heroin.
Respondent
Sentencing policy for drug trafficking is well settled. Street value is a minor factor. Defendant's role included importation and possession of bags for division and sale. Starting point of 10 years' imprisonment is correct.

05

Court’s reasoning

  1. 01

    Rimmer Lusk and Bade-v-AG [2001] JLR 373

    Sentencing for drug trafficking offences is well settled; street value is a minor factor; role and preparation for distribution are significant.

06

Ratio, limits and disposition

Ratio decidendi

The defendant imported and possessed Class A drugs with intent to distribute, and sentencing policy requires a starting point of 10 years' imprisonment, reduced for mitigation to 5½ years.

Court disposition

convicted and sentenced

  • 5½ years' imprisonment
  • forfeiture and destruction of the 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

[2011] JRC 197

JUDGMENT THE DEPUTY BAILIFF: 1. Mr Dobson, you arrived at Jersey Airport on 28 th April, carrying a large blue holdall, a computer satchel and a clear duty free bag containing tobacco. You were asked if you had anything to declare, including controlled drugs, and you said "no". Inside the bag were, however, some controlled drugs, 97.66 grams of cocaine at between 5% and 6% purity. In addition there was a self seal clear plastic bag which contained a further 96 clear self seal plastic bags. It seems pretty apparent from that, that the drugs were ready to be divided up and sold.

2. The Court's sentencing policy in relation to drug trafficking offences is well settled and these were Class A drugs. We follow the approach which has been set out in Rimmer Lusk and Bade-v-AG [2001] JLR 373 . It has been suggested that because of the relatively low street value of cocaine as opposed to heroin, we ought to reduce the starting point but it is clear from the case of Rimmer that street value is just one factor and a relatively minor factor to be taken into account. We have to have regard to your role in drug trafficking and, as I say, we have had regard to the fact that you not only brought the drugs in yourself, but you had with you the self seal bags in order that they could be divided up. In the circumstances the Court thinks that a starting point of 10 years' imprisonment is correct.

3. We have then looked to see what mitigation is available to you; we have given you credit for your guilty plea and the fact that you entered that plea very early. We have noted the remorse which you have expressed and noted that you have no previous convictions for drugs offences; also the other matters raised by your counsel and indeed having regard to all the information which is before the Court.

4. Nonetheless, we consider the conclusions of the Crown to be right and you are therefore sentenced to 5½ years' imprisonment.

5. We also order the forfeiture and destruction of the drugs. Authorities Rimmer Lusk and Bade-v-AG [2001] JLR 373 . Page Last Updated: 18 Aug 2016 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.

Rimmer Lusk and Bade-v-AG [2001] JLR 373

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.