The lawyer who successfully appealed the length of a young man’s prison sentence for importing ‘edibles’ has said the States “need to consider” changing some of the island’s sentencing laws.
He was originally given a nine and a half year sentence for the importation of THC, a two and a half year sentence for the importation of cannabis to run concurrently, and a consecutive sentence of one year for not giving police the PIN to his phone.
However, the Royal Court had sentenced Le Sauvage on the basis of the total weight of candy bars laced with THC – and not the actual weight of the THC.
The Bailiff agreed and allowed his appeal, saying that “it would be helpful to have resolved the question of the correct approach that a sentencing court should take to products such as these ‘edibles’, in particular in seeking to apply the Richards guidelines”.
When Le Sauvage’s appeal was heard, the Court of Appeal found fault with one area of the sentencing – and that focused on the edibles themselves.
It said that the weight of the candy bars in this case had distorted the sentencing, as the weight of the controlled substance contained in the bars is only a fraction of their total weight.
This means he is now serving a seven year prison sentence for the importation of THC, a two year and six month prison sentence for the importation of cannabis, to run concurrently, and a consecutive one year sentence for the RIPL offence.
His lawyer, Advocate Candy Fletcher has told Express that Le Sauvage’s case is evidence that the “States of Guernsey needs to consider whether THC (delta 8 and delta 9 THC) should be Class B substances rather than Class A.”
“Helpfully, the Court of Appeal saw value, regarding drugs not already covered by the Richards guidelines, in advice given by the Sentencing Council for England and Wales that ‘sentencers should expect to be provided with expert evidence to assist in determining the potency of the particular drug and in equating the quantity in the case with the quantities set out in the guidelines in terms of the harm caused’,” she said.
“This supports increased flexibility in sentencing for drugs which do not fit neatly into the Richards guidelines, taking into account the harm caused.
“However, unless THC changes from a Class A to Class B substance, as it is in England, edibles, such as those in this case, will still fall into a sentencing starting point bracket for Class A drugs in Richards (lowest bracket is 7-9 years starting point).
“In my view, the States of Guernsey needs to consider whether THC (delta 8 and delta 9 THC) should be Class B substances rather than Class A.”
The Committee for Home Affairs is politically responsible for setting sentencing policy, but legal precedent and decisions made on individual cases sits with the judiciary.
Following Le Sauvage’s successful appeal, the committee for Home Affairs confirmed to Express that it has started work to review sentencing policies, after its predecessors set the ball rolling in the last States.
When asked about Le Sauvage’s sentence in October, Deputy Marc Leadbeater, President of Home Affairs, was unable to comment on this specific case but he did confirm that his team has already started looking at what work might be carried out under a review of the Justice Framework – which could include proposing changes to sentencing guidelines.
“Sentencing is a matter for the Courts and it is not appropriate for the Committee to comment on specific cases,” he said.
“However, a review of sentencing policy is highlighted as part of the Justice Framework, which was approved by the Assembly last term, and the Committee has directed initial scoping of this work to be progressed alongside the Committee’s other priorities.”