Alliston v R

The appellant, Alliston, appealed against her conviction for drug trafficking under the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). The primary issue before the court was whether the trial judge erred in not allowing the jury to consider the defence known as the "Carey defence," which pertains to the temporary possession of drugs with the intention of returning them to the owner. The appellant argued that she had physical control of the drugs temporarily with the intention of returning them to their owner, and thus should not be convicted of trafficking.

The court examined the evidence presented during the trial and considered the legal principles governing the defence in question. The court concluded that although the appellant's evidence suggested she intended to return the drugs to their owner, this was not sufficient to exclude the possibility of trafficking beyond reasonable doubt. The court found no error in the trial judge's decision not to leave the Carey defence to the jury, as the appellant had not demonstrated that she had no intention of supplying the drugs. The court also noted that there was no adverse consequence for the appellant and no miscarriage of justice occurred, thus no lesser sentence was warranted.

The appeal was dismissed, and the conviction and sentence of the appellant were upheld. The court found that the trial judge had correctly applied the law and the evidence did not support the appellant's claim of temporary possession with the intention of returning the drugs. The appellant's appeal was unsuccessful, and the original conviction and sentence stood.