Australia, June 9 -- New South Wales Land and Environment Court issued text of the following judgement:

1. Stuart MacGill appears for sentence for an offence of knowingly taking part in the supply of the prohibited drug cocaine contrary to s.25(1) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). The offender entered a plea of not guilty at trial to an offence of knowingly taking part in the supply of not less than the large commercial quantity. The quantum alleged was 1kg, the lowest level for the offence provision. The Crown relied upon the statutory alternatives of not less than the commercial quantity which encompasses a quantity of between 250g and 1kg, and a simpliciter supply, which involves an amount less than 250g. The jury were satisfied beyond reasonable doubt only on the second alternative.

PENALTY

2. The maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment operates as a legislative guidepost and represents the legislature's assessment of the seriousness of the offence.

OFFER TO PLEAD

3. Consistent with the procedural requirements the parties engaged in a case conference in the Local Court. The Crown raised a concern about the accuracy of the case conference certificate. Despite this concern the Crown indicated it was legislatively constrained in endeavouring to ventilate those concerns. I therefore proceed on the unchallenged certificate. The offender offered to plead guilty to the offence of supplying a prohibited drug; the charge he was ultimately found guilty of. This offer was not accepted by the prosecution. The offender did not plead guilty when arraigned even though this was an available option. The offender challenged the evidence given by Mr A that inculpated him in the offending and the offender also gave evidence denying his involvement in any way that could be construed as knowingly taking part in any supply, regardless of quantum. This circumstance requires that the offender's offer to plead guilty before committal to the offence upon which a finding of guilt is made, entitles him to a reduction of 25% to the otherwise determined sentence.

FACTUAL FINDINGS

4. As this is a sentence after trial, I am required to determine the facts for sentence that are not inconsistent with the verdict. I am required to determine facts adverse to an offender beyond reasonable doubt and those that mitigate only on balance. This determination will be based on the evidence given in the trial. It will be informed by an appreciation of what is entailed in a finding of guilt which in turn is informed by the directions of law on the elements. This entails proceeding on the basis the jury were satisfied the offender knowingly took part in the supply of cocaine. The verdict does not intrinsically involve a weight other than the upper limit being 250g.

5. The Crown submissions on findings are informed by the evidence.

6. Counsel for the offender advanced detailed submissions of factual findings in relation to quantity and role. In making findings, I acknowledge the offender's submissions that include:

a) Submission 1: Referring to the deeming provision.

b) Resolution: I consider this had and has no application.

c) Submission 2: There was no evidence led of any weight between 3g [the traffickable amount] and 250g [the upper limit of a simpliciter offence]. The jury were never instructed on a lower limit of 3g. In the absence of this evidence, and the absence of proof of the offender's knowledge of what weight would correlate with a purchase price of $330,000, the verdict only established knowledge of a quantity between half a gram and one gram.

*Rest of the document can be viewed at: (https://www.caselaw.nsw.gov.au/decision/196c209c7ea35780343587be)

Disclaimer: Curated by HT Syndication.