AG -v- Dicker [2005] JRC 059 (29 April 2005)

AG -v- Dicker [2005] JRC 059 (29 April 2005)

Given the defendant's prior record and the circumstances of the case, a custodial sentence is necessary, but mitigation allows for a reduced term and concurrent sentences.

Citation
[2005] JRC 059
Parties
Defendant: Dicker; Prosecutor: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
29 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
convicted and sentenced
Legal Topics
Drug Offences, Sentencing, Mitigation, Confiscation Order
Criminal Law Drug Offences Sentencing Mitigation Confiscation Order

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 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Dicker

Defendant

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 appropriate sentence for possession of cannabis with intent to supply
  2. 2 consideration of prior convictions in sentencing
  3. 3 mitigating factors in sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

Given the defendant's prior record and the circumstances of the case, a custodial sentence is necessary, but mitigation allows for a reduced term and concurrent sentences.

Court Disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • £400 fine or 1 month's imprisonment on count 1
  • 12 months' imprisonment on count 2