R v Berry

In the matter of R v Berry, the applicant appealed against his sentence, contending that it was manifestly excessive. The applicant had been involved in a large-scale methylamphetamine trafficking operation and was convicted on one count of trafficking in dangerous drugs, one count of possessing a dangerous drug in excess of two grams and three related summary charges. He was sentenced to 10 years and two months’ imprisonment, with a serious violent offence declaration, requiring him to serve 80 per cent of his sentence before being eligible for parole. The applicant was aged between 24 and 25 years at the time of offending and there was evidence that he had ceased using drugs and had commenced rehabilitation after being charged with the present offences. He had also secured employment while on bail.

The court was required to determine whether the sentencing judge adequately considered the applicant's rehabilitation efforts when imposing sentence. The court noted that the applicant had been involved in a large-scale trafficking operation and had been a user of methylamphetamine himself. However, the court also noted that the applicant had ceased using drugs and had commenced rehabilitation after being charged with the present offences. The court held that the sentencing judge did not adequately consider the applicant's rehabilitation efforts when imposing sentence. The court found that the sentence was manifestly excessive and granted leave to appeal, allowing the appeal and setting aside the orders made on Charge 1. The court ordered that the applicant be imprisoned for nine years, with 256 days of pre-sentence custody to be counted as time already served, and that the applicant be eligible to apply for parole after serving four years of his term of imprisonment.