AG -v- Richards [2011] JRC 170 (31 August 2011)

AG -v- Richards [2011] JRC 170 (31 August 2011)

The Court sentenced the defendant based on the accepted basis of plea, disregarding unproven aggravating facts, and determined that a Valler uplift was not appropriate. Sentences for each count were imposed to run concurrently, resulting in a total of 3 years' imprisonment.

Citation
[2011] JRC 170
Parties
Prosecutor: Attorney General; Defendant: McKenzie
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
31 August 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
convicted and sentenced
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Drug Offences, Traffic Offences
Criminal Law Sentencing Drug Offences Traffic Offences

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 2
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Attorney General

Prosecutor

McKenzie

Defendant

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate sentencing for possession of ecstasy and diazepam with intent to supply
  2. 2 Consideration of aggravating and mitigating factors in sentencing
  3. 3 Application of Valler uplift in sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

The Court sentenced the defendant based on the accepted basis of plea, disregarding unproven aggravating facts, and determined that a Valler uplift was not appropriate. Sentences for each count were imposed to run concurrently, resulting in a total of 3 years' imprisonment.

Court Disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • Imprisonment: 3 years (concurrent sentences)
  • Disqualification from driving for 24 months from 14 March