Pearman v The State of Western Australia

In this case, Lucy Elizabeth Pearman, the appellant, sought leave to appeal against her sentence of 2 years 4 months' immediate imprisonment for the possession of 13.38 g of methylamphetamine with intent to sell or supply it to another, contrary to section 6(1)(a) of the Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA). The appeal was dismissed by the Court of Appeal of Western Australia, with the Court holding that the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive. The appellant argued that the sentence was unreasonable and unjust, given her personal circumstances and the fact that she had used drugs as a negative coping strategy for her difficult emotional states.

The court examined the legal principles governing appeals on the ground of manifest excess, noting that the sentence imposed on the appellant was less than 10% of the available maximum penalty of 25 years' imprisonment. The court also considered the nature of the offending, which was part of an ongoing course of selling methylamphetamine for profit. While the appellant pleaded guilty, her plea was late and only attracted a 10% discount under section 9AA of the Sentencing Act. The court further noted that the major sentencing considerations for offences of dealing or trafficking in dangerous drugs of addiction are general and personal deterrence.

The court concluded that it was not reasonably arguable that error should be inferred in the present case on the basis that the sentence for the drug offence is unreasonable or plainly unjust. The court also held that the absence of a letter written by the appellant to her legal advisers from prison did not affect the sentence imposed, as the sentencing judge had already taken into account the appellant's use of drugs as a negative coping strategy. Consequently, the court refused the appellant leave to appeal and dismissed the appeal.