![]() |
[Home] [Databases] [World Law] [Multidatabase Search] [Help] [Feedback] [DONATE] | |
Jersey Unreported Judgments |
||
You are here: BAILII >> Databases >> Jersey Unreported Judgments >> AG v Pacheco (Royal Court : Sentencing (Criminal)) [2025] JRC 048 (20 February 2025) URL: https://www.bailii.org/je/cases/UR/2025/2025_048.html Cite as: [2025] JRC 048, [2025] JRC 48 |
[New search] [Help]
Superior Number Sentencing - drugs - supply - Class A
Before : |
R. J. MacRae, Esq., Deputy Bailiff, and Jurats Ronge, Le Cornu, Cornish, Le Heuzé and Hughes. |
The Attorney General
-v-
Steven Caldeira Pacheco
Sentencing by the Superior Number of the Royal Court, following a guilty plea to the following charges -
1 count of: |
Possession of a controlled drug with intent to supply contrary to Article 8(2) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 (Count 1). |
1 count of: |
Being concerned in the supply of a controlled drug, contrary to Article 5(c) of the Misuse of Drugs (Jersey) Law 1978 Count 2). |
Age: 30.
Plea: Guilty
Details of Offence:
On 25 October 2024, as part of a police investigation, the Defendant's home address was under surveillance. At 4:44pm a man (-˜Man 1') was seen by police entering the Defendant's address and leaving shortly after, Man 1 was detained and searched by police he was found to have possession of just under 2 grams of cocaine. The cocaine seized from Man 1 was 83% pure and estimated to have a value of £300 to £500.
At 5:03pm another man (-˜Man 2') was seen entering the Defendant's address and leaving shortly after. Man 2 was detained, and in the course of being detained he put something in his mouth and stated to police officers that he had swallowed cannabis.
At 5:24pm the Defendant was seen on his balcony using his phone, a third man (-˜Man 3') was then seen entering the Defendant's address and leaving after shortly after. Man 3 was then detained and searched by officers; he was found to have just under 4 grams of cocaine. The cocaine seized from Man 3 was found to be 84% pure and have a value of £600 to £1,000.
At 5:30pm Deive Pires entered the Defendant's address, he stayed inside for 10 minutes and then left. Pires was detained and searched by officers, he was found to have just under 30 grams of cocaine in his possession. The cocaine seized from Pires was found to be 39% pure and have a value of £4,500 to £7,500.
At 6:30pm the Defendant and his partner left the address and entered the Defendant's car when they were detained by police. The Defendant stated he had cash and drugs in the centre consol of his car, and a quantity of cocaine and cash was seized. The Defendant's address was also searched and officers found it to contain a quantity of white powder and drug paraphernalia including a vacuum sealer device, packaging rolls and scales.
The total amount of cocaine seized from the Defendant's car and address was 11.8 grams with a purity of 84% with an estimated value of £1,800 to £3,000. The total cash seized from the Defendant was £13,493.41 and €40.
The Defendant's phone was seized and found to contain drug related messages, including messages to the men arrested leaving the Defendant's address.
Details of Mitigation:
Benefit of early guilty pleas, all entered at the first opportunity.
Previous Convictions:
Defendant has 56 previous convictions including previous convictions for possession of a Class B drug in 2023, and possession of both Class A and Class B drugs in 2020.
Conclusions:
Count 1: |
6 years' imprisonment. |
Count 2: |
6 years and 8 months' imprisonment, concurrent. |
Total - 6 years and 8 months' imprisonment are the general conclusions.
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and phone seized in this case sought.
Postpone confiscation order sought to 21 March 2025.
Sentence and Observations of Court:
Count 1: |
6 years' imprisonment. |
Count 2: |
6 years' imprisonment |
Total - 6 years' imprisonment
Postponed confiscation order to 21 March 2025
Forfeiture and destruction of the drugs and phone seized ordered.
C. L. G. Carvalho, Crown Advocate.
Advocate J. P. Corbett for the Defendant.
JUDGMENT
THE DEPUTY BAILIFF:
1. Steven Caldera Pacheco, you are 30 years old and have appeared before the Courts of Jersey on many previous occasions. You have amassed a significant number of previous convictions including for dishonesty, driving offences and possession of drugs.
2. On 25 October 2024, your home address in St. Clement was under police surveillance. During a period of less than an hour, a number of people were seen coming to your home address and shortly thereafter leaving; Then they were apprehended and found to be carrying drugs, principally cocaine, that you had supplied to them. A Mr De Freitas came to your address and left shortly thereafter. He was stopped by the police, and he was in possession of 2 grams of cocaine. Mr Botting entered your home and left; he claimed to have swallowed cannabis whilst he was being detained by the police. A Mr Allen left your address during this period, he was detained and found in possession of 4 grams of cocaine, and Mr Pires, who appears alongside you in the dock today, left your home with just under 30 grams of cocaine; all this in under an hour.
3. De Freitas, Botting and Allen haven been dealt with either by the Magistrate's Court or at the Parish Hall. You were arrested at about 6.30 pm that day, and later the same evening 11.8 grams of cocaine was seized from your car and your home address. The drugs you supplied or had on you that day had a street value of between just under £9,000 and £15,000. Cash was seized from a variety of locations in your home and in your car, totalling just under £13,500.
4. In interview you gave the police little assistance, and you refused to provide the police with your PIN number, so as to enable them to easily access your mobile phone, and you refused to sign a bank disclosure authority. Nonetheless, you pleaded guilty at the first opportunity before the Magistrate's Court on 28 October 2024 and you will receive - in the usual way - full credit for that plea of guilty.
5. Your mobile phone when the police managed to break into it revealed that you are a regular dealer of cocaine, largely using the social media platform Snapchat. You supplied to individuals in addition to those who were seen coming and going from your house on the day of your arrest. The Crown say that you are a street level and wholesale supplier of Class A drugs, which is right because in the case of Mr Pacheco the amount was so substantial he went on to supply to others.
6. Some of the cocaine that was seized from you or supplied had a high purity, in particular all the cocaine at Count 1 had a purity of approximately 84%. The Crown suggests that that should result in an increase in the starting point to 9 years' imprisonment from 8 years on Count 1 and 10 years from 9 years on Count 2.
7. We accept the Crown's submissions in relation to Count 1 on the indictment but do not accept them in relation to Count 2 as there was a combination of purities in relation to the cocaine you supplied that day. Accordingly, we fix the starting point on Count 1 and Count 2 of the indictment as 9 years imprisonment.
8. We have regard to the pre-sentence report, and we note that you take full responsibility for your actions and make no excuse for what you did. You said that you were not planning on becoming a drug dealer but wanted to escape from various debts, partly caused by your own personal addiction to Class A drugs which started off costing you £80 a week and ended up costing you £1,000 a week on the basis of consumption of 7 grams a week. You told your supplier about your problems, and he suggested that you could do some work to settle your debts, and that is what you agreed to do.
9. Your use of drugs was exacerbated by various domestic circumstances, your partner having difficulties with work, and the death of your father in August 2023. We have read about this and other matters in the letters that you and those close to you have supplied, and we accept that your addiction has had a huge impact on your life and that of your family, particularly your son who is just 11 years old and you know you have let down badly.
10. You are assessed at being at high risk of further convictions. We do not doubt at all the sincerity of your remorse but having regard to all the aggravating and mitigating features of this case, we have concluded that the sentence of this court should be and is 6 years' imprisonment, concurrent on both counts. You may sit down.