AG v Pearce [2021] JRC 182 (05 July 2021)
- Citation
- [2021] JRC 182
- Status
- Judgment
- Jurisdiction
- Jersey
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing and Confiscation Proceedings
More details
- Posture
- Criminal / Sentencing and Confiscation Proceedings
On this page
Professional case brief
Research organized from the available case record
01
Holding and result
The Court agreed with the Crown's conclusions, sentencing the defendant to 7½ years' imprisonment on each of counts 10, 11, and 12 to run concurrently, and found exceptional circumstances warranting adjournment of confiscation proceedings.
Court disposition
Defendant sentenced to 7½ years' imprisonment on each of counts 10, 11, and 12 to run concurrently; confiscation proceedings adjourned.
Orders
- Defendant sentenced to 7½ years' imprisonment on counts 10, 11, and 12 to run concurrently.
- Attorney General's application for confiscation adjourned for a date to be fixed.
- Parties directed to attend Bailiff's judicial secretary to fix date.
- Viscount may seek input from Thaddeus Pearce on third party claims.
02
Material facts
Parties
Attorney General
Applicant Counsel: JonesDefendant
RespondentAmounts and remedies
- Imprisonment Term: 7.5
03
Procedural history
Posture
Criminal / Sentencing and Confiscation Proceedings
04
Questions and positions
Legal issues
- 01
appropriate sentence for counts 10, 11, and 12
- 02
adjournment of confiscation proceedings
- 03
third party claims in inventory
Party arguments
- Applicant
- The Crown submitted that the defendant should be sentenced and that exceptional circumstances warrant adjournment of confiscation proceedings.
- Respondent
- The defendant represented himself and made submissions opposing the Crown's conclusions.
05
Court’s reasoning
Legal principles
- 01
AG v Bhojwani [2011] JCA 034
Exceptional circumstances may warrant adjournment of confiscation proceedings.
- 02
AG v Michel [2007] JRC 120
Sentences for multiple counts may run concurrently.
06
Ratio, limits and disposition
Ratio decidendi
The Court agreed with the Crown's conclusions, sentencing the defendant to 7½ years' imprisonment on each of counts 10, 11, and 12 to run concurrently, and found exceptional circumstances warranting adjournment of confiscation proceedings.
Obiter and limits
- The Viscount may seek input from the defendant's brother, Thaddeus Pearce, regarding third party claims in the inventory.
Court disposition
Defendant sentenced to 7½ years' imprisonment on each of counts 10, 11, and 12 to run concurrently; confiscation proceedings adjourned.
- Defendant sentenced to 7½ years' imprisonment on counts 10, 11, and 12 to run concurrently.
- Attorney General's application for confiscation adjourned for a date to be fixed.
- Parties directed to attend Bailiff's judicial secretary to fix date.
- Viscount may seek input from Thaddeus Pearce on third party claims.
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 COMMISSIONER: 1. The Court has considered the submissions made by the defendant representing himself and by Advocate Jones who has stayed on in Court to assist for which we are grateful. In the light of those arguments we are going to set out our reasons in a written judgment which will follow shortly, but we can say that after careful consideration we agree with the conclusions of the Crown.
2. On each of Counts 10, 11 and 12 you are sentenced to 7½ years' imprisonment to run concurrently. That is a total of 7½ years' imprisonment.
3. In terms of the confiscation proceedings we agree that there are exceptional circumstances here warranting an adjournment of the Attorney General's application and that will therefore be adjourned for a date to be fixed and we direct the parties to attend upon the Bailiff's judicial secretary to fix that date.
4. We leave it to the Viscount as to whether she wishes to get the input of the defendant's brother, Thaddeus Pearce, on the third part claims set out in the inventory prepared by the Viscount. Authorities AG v Bhojwani [2011] JCA 034 Rae v AG [2017] JCA 197 Hagin v AG [2020] JCA 247 AG v Michel [2007] JRC 120 AG v Bhojwani [2010] JRC 116 AG v Goodwin [2016] JRC 165 AG v Fish and Hinds [2016] JRC 181A AG v Brennan [2016] JRC 234 AG v Rae and Spinola [2017] JRC 080 AG v Hagin [2020] JRC 176 AG v Thurban et Ors [2020] JRC 191A AG v Thurban et Ors [2020] JRC 212 Page Last Updated: 02 Aug 2021 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.