AG -v- Warren [2013] JRC 205 (21 October 2013)

AG -v- Warren [2013] JRC 205 (21 October 2013)

It is not an abuse of process for the prosecution to proceed with confiscation proceedings, as any default sentence would result from operation of law, not prosecutorial discretion, and prior correspondence did not constitute a binding agreement not to pursue confiscation.

Citation
[2013] JRC 205
Parties
Applicant: Mr Warren; Respondent: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
21 October 2013
Procedural Posture
Application to Stay Proceedings / Pre Sentencing
Outcome
application dismissed
Legal Topics
Abuse of Process, Confiscation Proceedings, Proceeds of Crime
Criminal Law Drug Trafficking Confiscation Abuse of Process Confiscation Proceedings Proceeds of Crime

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
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Mr Warren

Applicant

Attorney General

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Application to Stay Proceedings / Pre Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the confiscation proceedings constitute an abuse of process
  2. 2 Whether prior correspondence precludes the prosecution from seeking confiscation
  3. 3 Whether delay and loss of evidence justify a stay

Ratio Decidendi

It is not an abuse of process for the prosecution to proceed with confiscation proceedings, as any default sentence would result from operation of law, not prosecutorial discretion, and prior correspondence did not constitute a binding agreement not to pursue confiscation.

Court Disposition

application dismissed

Orders

  • Application to stay proceedings as abuse of process is rejected.
  • Confiscation proceedings may continue.