High Court Justice Charles Quin ruled on Tue 18^th June that Carnilo Naranjo, who had pleaded guilty on 4^th January 2013 to Conspiracy to Supply Cocaine, has a “criminal lifestyle” and consequently property transferred to him was as a result of his general criminal conduct.

On the 24th November 2010 the Defendant, Carnilo Naranjo, was arrested for offences under the Misuse of Drugs Law (2009 Revision) and during a search of the Defendant’s home address the police officers recovered CI$4,200.77, US$784.00, GBP£ 3,970.00, and, EU€60.00.

In addition, at the time of the Defendant’s arrest, and his subsequent attendance at George Town Police Station, he was searched and found to be in possession of US$752.00.  The Royal Cayman Islands Police Service  (RCIPS) officers seized all this cash.

Cocaine seized in relation to a supply from the Defendant on the 9th November 2010 to undercover RCIPS officers has a wholesale purchase price ranging between CI$50.00 to CI$100.00 per gram, and the value of the drugs secured on the 9th November 2010 was CI$39.50 based on the lowest figure.

A confiscation order was submitted by the Crown on 20^th Feb 2013.

The Defendant submitted three letters as his response to the order.

The Court is required to decide if the Defendant has a “criminal lifestyle”. If the Court decides   that the Defendant   has a  “criminal lifestyle”, it is required to decide if he has benefitted from his general criminal conduct.

Conspiracy to supply cocaine is a “criminal lifestyle” offence.

RCIPS Officers seized the following amounts of cash in the Defendant ‘s possession:

Currency        Amount

CI$                  4,200.77

US$                 784.00

GBP£               3,970.00

EU€                60.00

US$                 720.00

Total in CI$    10,262.13

The Crown submitted that the money seized by the undercover officers “was obtained by the Defendant as a result of his general criminal conduct”.

The Defendant argued that he had not benefitted from a general or a particular criminal conduct. He submitted he had worked from 2009 to 2010 and earned a living. In the Defendant ‘s Response to the Crown’s application he said that, whilst working at EW Ebanks Water Sports, he had a potential to earn a salary of CI$20,800.00 per annum. The Defendant submitted that he had worked part-time at Pappagallo. The Defendant also submitted that in September 2010 he had received cash of US$2,000.00 from his mother.

He also said he had made various trips from May to July 2010 mainly to the United Kingdom with one to Holland

He had sold jewellery, but that the receipts had mysteriously disappeared.  The Defendant also said that he bought and sold game consoles, iPods and a laptop computer- all of which were found in his apartment.

In addition, the Defendant rented an apartment at Treasure Island Resort Grand Cayman (“Treasure Island”) for CI$1,150.00 per month.  His evidence is that in September 2010 he paid Treasure Island two months’ rent and a deposit of $575.00 -amounting to CI$2,875.00 paid to Treasure Island. This amount provided him with the apartment from the 17th September 2010 up to and including the 17^th November 2010 – some 7 days before his arrest on the 24th November 2010.

Judge Quin in his analysis and conclusion said:

“The Defendant has not provided this Court with any evidence of his professed income from the sale of jewellery. There is no evidence that he makes jewellery. There is no evidence that he purchased jewellery wholesale.  There is no evidence that he sold jewellery. There are no invoices and no receipts. There is no evidence from any third parties that they bought jewellery from the Defendant.

“Similarly, there is no evidence that the Defendant bought or sold the other items found in his apartment or bought or sold any such similar items.

“There is evidence that the Defendant explained to the undercover police officers the various methods he employed to conceal illicit drugs whilst travelling overseas.

“The cash seized from the Defendant’s apartment is a quite a large amount, but what is also significant is that it was in four different currencies.

“The evidence that he flew across the Atlantic to the UK and Holland for short trips in May, June and July 2010, before he and his co-conspirator, Bonilla, started selling cocaine to the undercover police officers, leads to the inescapable inference that he was drug trafficking on a significant scale?

“When one closely examines the letters submitted by the Defendant in support of his request to dismiss the Crown’s application for a Confiscation Order, they do not bear close scrutiny.

“The letter from Ebanks Water Sports, dated the 6th April 2013, stated that the Defendant ‘s last day with the company was the 16th January 2010. Accordingly, this Court finds that that this letter is of no value and it does not assist the Defendant in relation to the Crown’s Application for the Confiscation of the cash.

“The letter dated the 9th February 2013 from Pappagallo merely states that the Defendant worked there on a part-time basis from 2009 to 2010 in the capacity of a busboy, and also that he worked at Pappagallo when he was a student in High School, which must have been some 10 years ago. This letter does not assist the Defendant.

“The letter which is purportedly from his mother, Olga Mayorquin Morris, dated the 13th March 2013, states that she gave the Defendant US$2,000.00 in September 2010 to assist him with his personal expenses.  It is the Court’s conclusion that, prima facie, with the Defendant being unemployed and having no other identifiable source of income at the time, this US$2,000.00 would have been used up to pay for the Defendant’s rent ofCI$2,875.00 for September, October and November 2010.

“There is a complete absence of evidence to support the Defendant’s claims being made via the three letters. There are no affidavits or witness statements in support of the explanations he seeks to give this Court for the funds in question. As DC Taylor states, there is no evidence of any legitimate source of income.”

The judge gave various cases of similar confiscation judgments with reasons before ruling as follows:

“In the case before this Court, the fact that the Defendant pleaded guilty to conspiracy to supply cocaine, which is a Schedule 1 offence, along with the evidence before the Court, does establish that the Defendant has a “criminal lifestyle” under s.68 (1)(a) of POCL 2008. I find that the assumption that property transferred to the Defendant was as a result of his general criminal conduct has not been displaced. Furthermore, I find that the assumption that the Defendant has benefitted from his general criminal conduct in the amount of Cl$10,626.13   has not been displaced by the Defendant’s evidence. The Defendant has failed to show that the assumptions are “incorrect” or that there has been any “serious risk of injustice.

“Accordingly, I find that the sum of CI$10,626.13, which is the CI equivalent of the four currencies found  in the Defendant ‘s  possession,  is a recoverable amount  and, consequently, I order its confiscation.”