AG -v- Bowler and Boustouler [2009] JRC 159 (12 August 2009)

AG -v- Bowler and Boustouler [2009] JRC 159 (12 August 2009)

Evidence of previous drug convictions of Mohammed and Boustouler is admissible against Bowler as it is probative of the prosecution's case on supply of heroin and its probative value outweighs any prejudicial effect. However, such evidence is not admissible against Boustouler as it is not probative of the charges against him and is highly prejudicial.

Citation
[2009] JRC 159
Parties
Defendant: Bowler; Co Accused/defendant: Lee Michael Boustouler; Witness/other: Roland Parry; Witness/other: Paul Mohammed; Prosecution: The Prosecution
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
12 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Pre Trial Evidentiary Ruling
Outcome
Prosecution's application to admit previous convictions is granted in respect of Bowler and refused in respect of Boustouler. The charges against Boustouler are to be tried separately. Certain interview transcript passages are to be retained or deleted as specified.
Legal Topics
Admissibility of Previous Convictions, Drug Offences, Similar Fact Evidence, Prejudicial Vs Probative Value
Criminal Law Evidence Law Admissibility of Previous Convictions Drug Offences Similar Fact Evidence Prejudicial Vs Probative Value

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 3 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Bowler

Defendant

Lee Michael Boustouler

Co Accused/defendant

Roland Parry

Witness/other

Paul Mohammed

Witness/other

The Prosecution

Prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Pre Trial Evidentiary Ruling

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether previous drug convictions of recipients can be admitted as evidence against Bowler for supplying heroin
  2. 2 Whether previous drug convictions of Boustouler can be admitted as evidence against him for obstruction and possession
  3. 3 Whether certain interview transcript passages should be excluded

Ratio Decidendi

Evidence of previous drug convictions of Mohammed and Boustouler is admissible against Bowler as it is probative of the prosecution's case on supply of heroin and its probative value outweighs any prejudicial effect. However, such evidence is not admissible against Boustouler as it is not probative of the charges against him and is highly prejudicial.

Court Disposition

Prosecution's application to admit previous convictions is granted in respect of Bowler and refused in respect of Boustouler. The charges against Boustouler are to be tried separately. Certain interview transcript passages are to be retained or deleted as specified.

Orders

  • Prosecution may adduce previous convictions of Mohammed and Boustouler in the case against Bowler.
  • Prosecution may not adduce previous convictions of Boustouler in the case against him.