AG -v- Moreira [2007] JRC 225 (30 November 2007)
- Citation
- [2007] JRC 225
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing
More details
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
Given the seriousness of the offence, the defendant's extensive criminal record, failed non-custodial sentences, and ongoing drug addiction, a custodial sentence is necessary for punishment and protection of society.
Court disposition
convicted and sentenced
Orders
- Defendant sentenced to 3 years' imprisonment.
- Warning issued regarding risk of extended sentence under Criminal Justice (Jersey) Law 1957 for future offences.
02
Material facts
Parties
Moreira
Defendant Counsel: defence counselCrown Advocate
Prosecutor Counsel: Crown AdvocateAmounts and remedies
- Imprisonment Term: 3
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
appropriate sentence for breaking and entering by a repeat offender with drug addiction
- 02
application of non-custodial versus custodial sentences
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The defendant pleaded guilty, has had a difficult upbringing, maintains a good relationship with his daughters, and has shown some remorse through a letter presented by counsel.
- Respondent
- The defendant has a very bad criminal record, has shown indifference to the charge, is a heroin addict, and non-custodial sentences have been tried and are not recommended.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
Criminal Justice (Jersey) Law 1957
Seriousness of offence and protection of society justify custodial sentence for repeat offenders, especially where non-custodial sentences have failed.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
Given the seriousness of the offence, the defendant's extensive criminal record, failed non-custodial sentences, and ongoing drug addiction, a custodial sentence is necessary for punishment and protection of society.
Obiter and limits
- The court does not consider the defendant a hopeless case and encourages rehabilitation.
- The defendant's relationship with his daughters is noted as a positive factor.
- A warning is issued regarding the risk of an extended sentence under the Criminal Justice (Jersey) Law 1957 if further offences are committed after release.
Court disposition
convicted and sentenced
- Defendant sentenced to 3 years' imprisonment.
- Warning issued regarding risk of extended sentence under Criminal Justice (Jersey) Law 1957 for future offences.
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 BAILIFF: 1. This defendant has pleaded guilty to a single count of breaking and entering with intent to commit a crime. The offence was committed in broad daylight and the young householder found himself confronted by the defendant in circumstances which must have been extremely frightening. When the police arrived he was still shaking with fear. Moreira expressed no remorse until this morning when his counsel passed up a letter from him.
2. Moreira has a very bad criminal record and has served a number of prison terms, non-custodial sentences have been tried and are not recommended in this case. The Alcohol and Drugs Service Report states that he shows a worrying indifference to the charge which he faces. He is a heroin addict and much of his criminal history relates to the feeding of this drug habit or attempts to settle drug debts.
3. In mitigation he has pleaded guilty to the offence although only after being confronted with incontrovertible evidence of his guilt. He has had in some respects a difficult up-bringing although his mother and sisters are still supportive of him.
4. Moreira, you understand I am sure that we have to punish you for what is a serious offence. The Court has looked to see if there is some other way of dealing with you but frankly we do not think that there is. We do want you to know, however, that we do not think that you are a hopeless case. You have talents as your counsel has told us. You can keep a job when you try and we hope that you will take advantage of the help which will be available to you in the prison and that when you come out you will keep out of trouble.
5. Your two daughters, with whom you have a good relationship, will need you and will need you increasingly as they grow older and it is up to you whether you let them down again or whether you keep on the straight and narrow.
6. The Crown Advocate has issued a warning and we have to repeat that. If after your release you do commit further offences you will be at risk of an extended sentence under the Criminal Justice (Jersey) Law 1957 and that would mean that the Court would be able, in order to protect society from offending by you, to impose a sentence of preventative detention of between 5 years and 14 years. We hope very much that it will not come to that and that when you get out of prison you will go straight and that we do not see you again.
7. In the meantime the conclusions are granted and you are sentenced to 3 years' imprisonment. Authorities Criminal Justice (Jersey) Law 1957. Page Last Updated: 26 Jun 2015 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.