AG v Vipond [2004] JRC 029 (12 February 2004)

AG v Vipond [2004] JRC 029 (12 February 2004)

Given the defendant's close involvement and the large quantity of drugs, a substantial custodial sentence is warranted, with reductions for a guilty plea, admissions, youth, lack of prior convictions, and remorse.

Citation
[2004] JRC 029
Parties
Defendant: Vipond; Prosecutor: Crown Advocate
Jurisdiction
Jersey
Judgment Date
12 February 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
convicted and sentenced
Legal Topics
Drug Trafficking, Sentencing, Mitigation, Forfeiture
Criminal Law Drug Trafficking Sentencing Mitigation Forfeiture

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Vipond

Defendant

Crown Advocate

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 appropriate sentence for minding a large quantity of ecstasy
  2. 2 degree of involvement of a minder in drug trafficking
  3. 3 mitigating factors in sentencing

Ratio Decidendi

Given the defendant's close involvement and the large quantity of drugs, a substantial custodial sentence is warranted, with reductions for a guilty plea, admissions, youth, lack of prior convictions, and remorse.

Court Disposition

convicted and sentenced

Orders

  • imprisonment for eleven years
  • forfeiture and destruction of the drugs