AG v Doublet [2003] JRC 205 (13 November 2003)

AG v Doublet [2003] JRC 205 (13 November 2003)

The court held that there was no reason to go below the normal minimum starting point of 7 years for possession with intent to supply, and that full allowance for mitigation had already been made. The defendant's role as a 'minder' did not reduce culpability, and the sentence was set accordingly.

Citation
[2003] JRC 205
Parties
Defendant: The Defendant; Prosecution: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
13 November 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
convicted and sentenced
Legal Topics
Drug Offences, Sentencing, Probation Breach
Criminal Law Drug Offences Sentencing Probation Breach

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 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Defendant

Defendant

The Crown

Prosecution

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 appropriate sentence for possession with intent to supply cannabis resin and ecstasy
  2. 2 effect of mitigation including guilty plea and cooperation
  3. 3 consequences of breach of probation

Ratio Decidendi

The court held that there was no reason to go below the normal minimum starting point of 7 years for possession with intent to supply, and that full allowance for mitigation had already been made. The defendant's role as a 'minder' did not reduce culpability, and the sentence was set accordingly.

Court Disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • Count 1: 16 months' imprisonment
  • Count 2: 4 years' imprisonment, concurrent