AG v Prentice [2003] JRC 183 (16 October 2003)

Even accepting the defendant was a minder for a short period, the substantial quantity of drugs and his proximity to the source of supply justified a significant custodial sentence.

Citation: [2003] JRC 183
Parties: Defendant: Prentice; Prosecutor: Attorney General
Jurisdiction: Jersey
Judgment Date: 16 October 2003
Procedural Posture: Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome: convicted and sentenced
Legal Topics: Drug Offences, Sentencing, Possession With Intent to Supply, Role of Minder in Drug Supply

Criminal Law Drug Offences Sentencing Possession With Intent to Supply Role of Minder in Drug Supply

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4

Parties

Prentice

Defendant

Attorney General

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

1 Appropriate sentence for defendant acting as minder in supply of substantial quantity of cannabis resin
2 Distinction in culpability between minder, courier, and dealer in drug supply offences

Ratio Decidendi

Even accepting the defendant was a minder for a short period, the substantial quantity of drugs and his proximity to the source of supply justified a significant custodial sentence.

Court Disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

5.5 years' imprisonment on count 2
1 week's imprisonment concurrent on count 1