1998/141 - AG v O'Hara [1998] UR 141 (3 July 1998)

1998/141 - AG v O'Hara [1998] UR 141 (3 July 1998)

The seriousness of possessing amphetamine sulphate with intent to supply, combined with the breach of a probation order, necessitates a custodial sentence; non-custodial options are not justified.

Citation
[1998] UR 141
Parties
Defendant: O'Hara; Prosecutor: Attorney General
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
03 July 1998
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
convicted and sentenced
Legal Topics
Drug Offences, Probation Breach, Youth Detention, Sentencing
Criminal Law Drug Offences Probation Breach Youth Detention Sentencing

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 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

O'Hara

Defendant

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether O'Hara is guilty of possession of amphetamine sulphate with intent to supply
  2. 2 Whether a custodial sentence is justified for the offences
  3. 3 Whether the breach of the Probation Order warrants additional penalty

Ratio Decidendi

The seriousness of possessing amphetamine sulphate with intent to supply, combined with the breach of a probation order, necessitates a custodial sentence; non-custodial options are not justified.

Court Disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • 6 months Youth Detention on count one
  • 1 month Youth Detention on count two (concurrent)