Kolaka v The Queen

The appeal before Grant CJ, Southwood and Barr JJ concerned the sentencing of the appellant, Kolaka, for drug offences. Kolaka was sentenced to four years and 10 months imprisonment for possessing $121,755 knowing it was the proceeds of cannabis supply, and two years and 10 months imprisonment for possessing cannabis. The appellant argued that the sentence for the proceeds of crime offence was manifestly excessive and that both sentences should be served concurrently.

The court was required to determine whether the sentence imposed for possessing the proceeds of drug supply was manifestly excessive, and whether the sentence for possessing cannabis was manifestly excessive. Additionally, the court considered whether the sentences should be served concurrently and the appropriate minimum non-parole period, particularly in light of the Sentencing Act's provisions regarding specified offences.

The court found that the sentence of four years and 10 months for possessing the proceeds of drug supply was not manifestly excessive, given the appellant's deliberate engagement in drug dealing for financial gain. However, the sentence of two years and 10 months for possessing cannabis was deemed manifestly excessive. The court resentenced the appellant to 18 months imprisonment for the cannabis possession offence, to be served concurrently with the sentence for the proceeds of crime offence. As only one of the offences was a specified offence under section 55 of the Sentencing Act, the minimum non-parole period was set at 50 per cent of the total sentence. The appeal was allowed in part.