Legal Research
Cases
R v Lamb, Brandon

R v Lamb, Brandon

Case [2017] NSWDC 380 17 August 2017

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

District Court

New South Wales

Amendment notes

Medium Neutral Citation: R v LAMB, Brandon [2017] NSWDC 380
Hearing dates: 17 August 2017
Date of orders: 17 August 2017
Decision date: 17 August 2017
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:
Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [85]

Catchwords: CRIMINAL – SENTENCE – two counts of supply prohibited drugs – 28 grams of MDMA – Form 1 matters of supply prohibited drugs and dealing with proceeds of crime – offences concerned the – full discount for early plea of guilty – 21 years old – no prior criminal history – offender used and supplied small quantities of prohibited drugs – connection between drug addiction and the offender’s upbringing and the need to promote rehabilitation – no financial benefit obtained from the supply of the drugs – currently in a stable relationship with permanent employment – full discount for early plea of guilty plus an additional discount for assistance to police – ‘special circumstances’ determined.
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)
Cases Cited: Attorney General’s Application (Number 1) of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147
R v Cacciola (1998) 104 A Crim R 178
R v Carrion (2000) 49 NSWLR 149
R v Clark (NSWCCA, 15 March 1990, unreported)
EF v R [2015] NSWCCA 36
R v Ejefekaire [2016] NSWCCA 308
R v Fayd’herbe [2007] NSWCCA 20
Forti v R [2016] NSWCCA 126
R v Gip (2006) 161 A Crim R 173
R v Gu [2006] NSWCCA 104
Hili v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 45
R v Lattouf (NSWCCA, 12 December 1996, unreported)
R v Polley [2014] NSWDC 323
R v Blackman and Walters [2001] NSWCCA 121
R v Henry (Ors) (1999) 46 NSWLR 346
Smaragdis v R [2010] NSWCCA 276
Thomson v Houlton [2000] NSWCCA 309
Yardley v Betts (1979) 22 SASR 108
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Brandon Lamb (Offender)
Representation: Solicitors:
Mr Curran (Solicitor)
Ms Cooney (Solicitor)

File Number(s): 2016/00293785
Publication restriction: Nil

SENTENCE

HIS HONOUR: Brandon Lamb appears today for sentence in relation to two offences contrary to s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. Each of these offences carries a maximum penalty of fifteen years imprisonment and/or 2,000 penalty units. There is no standard non-parole period in relation to each offence.
There are three matters on a Form 1, two of supplying a prohibited drug and one offence of dealing with proceeds of crime in the sum of $920 related to the activities arising from either the principal offences and/or the matters on the Form 1, probably a combination of both. The ‘deal with proceeds of crime’ offence is one that carries a maximum penalty of three years imprisonment contrary to s 93C(2) Crimes Act 1900. There is no standard non-parole period for that maximum penalty.
The two matters on the Form 1 of supply carry the same maximum penalty but having said that they are of such small quantities one…

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading R v Lamb, Brandon

Details

AGLC: R v Lamb, Brandon [2017] NSWDC 380
Case: [2017] NSWDC 380
Decision Date: 17 August 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Lamb, the accused, Brandon Lamb, faced sentencing for two counts related to the supply of prohibited drugs, specifically 28 grams of MDMA. The matter was heard in the Magistrates' Court of Victoria. Lamb pleaded guilty to the charges, which involved matters of supplying prohibited drugs and dealing with proceeds of crime. The court was required to determine an appropriate sentence, taking into account various factors such as the nature and circumstances of the offence, the offender's background, and the principle of proportionality.

The court addressed several legal issues, including the discount for an early plea of guilty and the consideration of special circumstances that might warrant a departure from the usual sentencing guidelines. Lamb, at 21 years old with no prior criminal history, had supplied small quantities of prohibited drugs and was currently in a stable relationship with permanent employment. The court considered his addiction to drugs and the impact of his upbringing, as well as the lack of financial benefit derived from the supply of the drugs. The offender also provided assistance to the police, which was another factor influencing the sentencing decision.

The court determined that the full discount for the early plea of guilty, combined with an additional discount for the assistance provided to the police, was appropriate. It also found that the circumstances surrounding the offence warranted a departure from the usual sentencing approach, qualifying as "special circumstances." Consequently, the court imposed a full-time custodial sentence, reflecting the need for punishment, deterrence, and rehabilitation, while also considering the offender's personal circumstances.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [85]

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v Lamb, Brandon [2017] NSWDC 380

Cases citing this decision · 0 of 0 shown

No citing cases yet.

Cases cited in this decision · 15 of 15 shown

R v Ejefekaire
[2016] NSWCCA 308 Para 60

…f Fullerton J in Smaragdis v R [2010] NSWCCA 276 at [30]-[31] and the discussion of both these judgment in a relatively recent judgment of Ejefekaire [2016] NSWCCA 308, particularly at [49]-[62].…
Hayek v R
[2016] NSWCCA 126 Para 62

…he decision I have referred to were also the subject of discussion in a slightly earlier decision to Ejefekaire . That is the decision of Forti v R [2016] NSWCCA 126 at [19]. I am mindful, for example, in the context of what I am discussing are the observations of Priestley JA in Cacciola , approved in the most rece…
Singh v The Queen
[2015] NSWCCA 257 Para 66

…be fairly said of course although it was not expressly stated in submission, that there are aspects of EF and Polley , which was decided on appeal at [2015] NSWCCA 257, to a limited extent, given what the High Court said in Hili , provide some comparative sentencing assistance. As does the decision of Fayd’Herbe whe…
EF v R
[2015] NSWCCA 36 Para 60

…to me since I last heard the submissions and I was dealing with the trial just finished a moment ago. Those judgments include the decision of EF v R [2015] NSWCCA 36, particularly the observations of Simpson J at [10]-[13], the judgment of Fullerton J in Smaragdis v R [2010] NSWCCA 276 at [30]-[31] and the discuss…
R v Polley
[2014] NSWDC 323 Para 59

…es, is the great weight that must be placed upon general deterrence and personal deterrence in respect of such offending. One such case is Polley [2014] NSWDC 323, that judgment of Judge Berman being approved by the Court of Criminal Appeal.…
Smaragdis v R
[2010] NSWCCA 276 Para 60

…nclude the decision of EF v R [2015] NSWCCA 36, particularly the observations of Simpson J at [10]-[13], the judgment of Fullerton J in Smaragdis v R [2010] NSWCCA 276 at [30]-[31] and the discussion of both these judgment in a relatively recent judgment of Ejefekaire [2016] NSWCCA 308, particularly at [49]-[62].…
Pulitano v R
[2010] NSWCCA 45

…NSWCCA 20 Forti v R [2016] NSWCCA 126 R v Gip (2006) 161 A Crim R 173 R v Gu [2006] NSWCCA 104 Hili v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 45 R v Lattouf (NSWCCA, 12 December 1996, unreported) R v Polley [2014] NSWDC 323 R v Blackman and Walters [2001] NSWCCA 121 R v Henry (Ors) (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 Smaragdis v R [2010] NSWCCA 2…
Fayd'herbe v R
[2007] NSWCCA 20 Para 58

…4 A Crim R 178, the decision of Carrion (2000) 49 NSWSLR 149, the decision of Gip & Ly (2006) 161 A Crim R 173, Gu [2006] NSWCCA 104 and Fayd’herbe [2007] NSWCCA 20. I am mindful of the judgment of McClellan J in Gip , for example, that substantial trafficking in prohibited drugs can on occasion be established just…
R v Gu
[2006] NSWCCA 104 Para 58

…the decision of Cacciola (1998) 104 A Crim R 178, the decision of Carrion (2000) 49 NSWSLR 149, the decision of Gip & Ly (2006) 161 A Crim R 173, Gu [2006] NSWCCA 104 and Fayd’herbe [2007] NSWCCA 20. I am mindful of the judgment of McClellan J in Gip , for example, that substantial trafficking in prohibited drugs c…
Re Attorney-General's Application (No 1 of 2002) (NSW)
[2002] NSWCCA 518 Para 6

…s decisions of the Court of Criminal Appeal on this topic, particularly the guideline judgment of Attorney General’s Application (Number 1) of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147 and the various observations of the Court between [18] - [44]. Of course when taking into account matters on a Form 1 in consideration of the principal…
R v Carrion
[2002] NSWCCA 21

…ney General’s Application (Number 1) of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147 R v Cacciola (1998) 104 A Crim R 178 R v Carrion (2000) 49 NSWLR 149 R v Clark (NSWCCA, 15 March 1990, unreported) EF v R [2015] NSWCCA 36 R v Ejefekaire [2016] NSWCCA 308 R v Fayd’herbe [2007] NSWCCA 20 Forti v R [2016] NSWCCA 126 R v Gip (2006) 161 A C…
R v Blackman and Walters
[2001] NSWCCA 121 Para 37

…ustice King were adopted with approval in a number of decisions in New South Wales, but one decision I need cite and that is R v Blackman and Walters [2001] NSWCCA 121. In the judgment of learned Justice Wood, to whom I previously referred. In that regard I note Blackman and Walters was a Crown appeal about totally…
Morawski v State Rail Authority
[2000] NSWCCA 309

…Walters [2001] NSWCCA 121 R v Henry (Ors) (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 Smaragdis v R [2010] NSWCCA 276 Thomson v Houlton [2000] NSWCCA 309 Yardley v Betts (1979) 22 SASR 108 Category: Sentence Parties: Regina (Crown) Brandon Lamb (Offender) Representation: Solicitors: Mr Curran (Solicitor) Ms Cooney (Solicitor) File Number(s…
R v Henry
[1999] NSWCA 111 Para 17

…That aspect of the matter brings into play an aspect of the judgment of R v Henry (Ors) (1999) 46 NSWLR 346, particularly in the judgment of Wood J, who at that point in 1998/1999 was the CJ at CL. Wood J, quite famously at [237] in that guideline judgment, the second guideline judgment handed down by the Court of Cri…
Yardley v Betts
(1979) 22 SASR 108

…CCA 121 R v Henry (Ors) (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 Smaragdis v R [2010] NSWCCA 276 Thomson v Houlton [2000] NSWCCA 309 Yardley v Betts (1979) 22 SASR 108 Category: Sentence Parties: Regina (Crown) Brandon Lamb (Offender) Representation: Solicitors: Mr Curran (Solicitor) Ms Cooney (Solicitor) File Number(s): 2016/00293785 Public…

Legislation cited in this decision · 3

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 28)
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)
1 mention (from Para 2)
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 1)

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v LAMB, Brandon [2017] NSWDC 380
Hearing dates:	17 August 2017
Date of orders:	17 August 2017
Decision date:	17 August 2017
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:	Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [85]
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL – SENTENCE – two counts of supply prohibited drugs – 28 grams of MDMA – Form 1 matters of supply prohibited drugs and dealing with proceeds of crime – offences concerned the – full discount for early plea of guilty – 21 years old – no prior criminal history – offender used and supplied small quantities of prohibited drugs – connection between drug addiction and the offender’s upbringing and the need to promote rehabilitation – no financial benefit obtained from the supply of the drugs – currently in a stable relationship with permanent employment – full discount for early plea of guilty plus an additional discount for assistance to police – ‘special circumstances’ determined.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Attorney General’s Application (Number 1) of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147 R v Cacciola (1998) 104 A Crim R 178 R v Carrion (2000) 49 NSWLR 149 R v Clark (NSWCCA, 15 March 1990, unreported) EF v R [2015] NSWCCA 36 R v Ejefekaire [2016] NSWCCA 308 R v Fayd’herbe [2007] NSWCCA 20 Forti v R [2016] NSWCCA 126 R v Gip (2006) 161 A Crim R 173 R v Gu [2006] NSWCCA 104 Hili v The Queen [2010] NSWCCA 45 R v Lattouf (NSWCCA, 12 December 1996, unreported) R v Polley [2014] NSWDC 323 R v Blackman and Walters [2001] NSWCCA 121 R v Henry (Ors) (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 Smaragdis v R [2010] NSWCCA 276 Thomson v Houlton [2000] NSWCCA 309 Yardley v Betts (1979) 22 SASR 108
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Brandon Lamb (Offender)
Representation:	Solicitors: Mr Curran (Solicitor) Ms Cooney (Solicitor)
File Number(s):	2016/00293785
Publication restriction:	Nil