R v Lloyd; R v Norris
[2018] ACTSC 314
•21 August 2018
SUPREME COURT OF THE AUSTRALIAN CAPITAL TERRITORY
Case Title: | R v Lloyd; R v Norris |
Citation: | [2018] ACTSC 314 |
Hearing Date: | 21 August 2018 |
DecisionDate: | 21 August 2018 |
Before: | Burns J |
Decision: | See [16]-[17] |
Catchwords: | CRIMINAL LAW – JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – Judgment and Punishment – Sentence – trafficking a trafficable quantity of cannabis – joint commission – dealing with the proceeds of crime – objective seriousness – first offender – testimonials – CADAS Report – prospects for rehabilitation – plea of guilty – second offender – prior convictions – testimonials – psychological report – good prospects for rehabilitation – sentences of imprisonment imposed – wholly suspended |
Legislation Cited: | Crimes Act 1900 (ACT) s 114C Criminal Code 2002 (ACT) s 603(5) |
Parties: | The Queen (Crown) Oliver Mitchell Lloyd (Offender) Michaela Norris (Offender) |
Representation: | Counsel Mr D Swan (Crown) Mr K Ginges (Offender – Mr Lloyd) Mr R Davies (Offender – Ms Norris) |
| Solicitors ACT Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Aulich Law (Offender – Mr Lloyd) Legal Aid ACT (Offender – Ms Norris) | |
File Numbers: | SCC 154 of 2018; SCC 158 of 2018 (Mr Lloyd) SCC 155 of 2018; SCC 156 of 2018 (Ms Norris) |
BURNS J:
Michaela Norris and Oliver Lloyd, each of you have pleaded guilty to an offence of trafficking a trafficable quantity of cannabis, contrary to s 603(5) of the Criminal Code 2002 (ACT). It is alleged that you were jointly involved in that offence.
Each of you have also pleaded guilty to an offence of dealing with the proceeds of crime, contrary to s 114C of the Crimes Act 1900 (ACT).
The maximum penalty for the offence of trafficking in a trafficable quantity of cannabis is 10 years' imprisonment, a fine of $150,000 or both. The maximum penalty for the offence of dealing with the proceeds of crime is a sentence of two years' imprisonment, a fine of $30,000 or both.
Agreed Statements of Facts have been tendered in the course of this hearing. I will not recite the Statement of Facts at this point. It is, however, necessary to determine the objective seriousness of the offence of trafficking in a trafficable quantity of cannabis. I take into account the amount of cannabis involved which was an amount of 1.97 kilograms.
As has been pointed out, the range of weight of cannabis, which is relevant to a trafficable quantity, is between 300 grams and 30 kilograms, so that the amount of 1.97 kilograms is towards the bottom of that range, although clearly not at the bottom. I accept, of course, that the quantity of cannabis is only one of the circumstances to be taken into account in determining the objective seriousness of the offence.
I accept that your purpose in possessing this quantity of cannabis was partly for supply to others, and also partly for your own consumption. I accept the submission that was made that you would buy cannabis in bulk and then sell some on to others, and particularly to friends. It is clear to my mind that there was some element or profit involved, and that was accepted by Mr Ginges on behalf of Mr Lloyd, in that he submitted that the cannabis sold was used to purchase further cannabis, but also there was some amount which was used to support day-to-day living expenses. So, to that extent I accept that there was an element of profit involved. I would describe this particular offence as being towards the upper end of the bottom level of the range.
Oliver Lloyd
I take into account, Mr Lloyd, that you are 26 years of age and that you have no prior convictions. There are testimonials before me which speak of the fact that this conduct was out of character. I note that you commenced using cannabis when you were 19 years of age, when you were first diagnosed with epilepsy. You ultimately progressed in the use of cannabis, to the stage where you were using about 10 grams a day. It is, of course, to your credit that you have now stopped using cannabis since you were arrested and charged with this offence. You initially accepted some counselling with respect to your cannabis use, however, you found that to be of limited use, and the CADAS Report indicates that you have moved on from that point to the extent that the author of that report no longer considers it necessary for you to undertake counselling with respect to cannabis abuse.
You have taken the very significant step with your partner and co-offender, of setting up a business. That is now functioning, and apparently is able to return a moderate income. Clearly, you have hopes for the development of that business. I accept that you are remorseful with respect to the commission of these offences, and I am satisfied that you have good prospects for rehabilitation.
You entered a plea of guilty to the cannabis charge in the Magistrates' Court, but not at the earliest opportunity. As I indicated in argument with Mr Ginges, I propose to allow a discount of 20 per cent on the otherwise appropriate sentence in order to reflect your plea of guilty. Your plea of guilty, of course, had significant utilitarian value, but I am also satisfied that it demonstrates remorse.
Michaela Norris
10. Ms Norris, I take into account the fact that you are 23 years old. You have, unfortunately, prior convictions for different types of offending. I do not place great weight on those convictions in sentencing you for the present matter because the context of those prior offences has been revealed in some of the testimonials that have been provided, and in particular that which was provided by your mother, so that I do not place great weight with respect to those prior convictions in sentencing you today.
11. I take into account the psychological report from Mr North, a clinical psychologist, which refers to childhood trauma which had not previously been properly addressed. Mr North refers to you commencing cannabis and alcohol use to cope from an early age. Indeed I note that he records that you were diagnosed with a major depressive disorder at age 12, and that you also have a history of self-harm. His current diagnosis was one of post‑traumatic stress disorder and major depressive disorder. I take into account the fact that you have ceased using cannabis, and according to the material before me there has been a significant improvement in both your mental and physical health since your cessation of cannabis use.
12. I also note that you have voluntarily undertaken counselling with Mr North, in order to deal with these issues. I accept that you also have demonstrated remorse with respect to this matter, and have also taken the step, as I already indicated with respect to Mr Lloyd, of commencing a business, in which are both involved. I am satisfied that you also have good prospects for rehabilitation.
13. It has been conceded, and I think rightly so, by each of your counsel, that these offences call for the imposition of terms of imprisonment. However, I am satisfied, bearing in mind the previous authorities to which I was taken, and also the particular circumstances of the present case, that the requirements of sentencing will be satisfied by sentences that are wholly suspended.
14. I see no reason to distinguish between the two of you with respect to the sentences that I will impose.
15. I should also add that in sentencing you with respect to these matters I have taken into account the fact that each of you spent one night in custody.
Sentence
16. With regard to the offence of trafficking a trafficable quantity of cannabis, each of you will be convicted and each of you will be sentenced to eight months' of imprisonment, which I have reduced from 10 months in order to reflect your pleas of guilty. That sentence will commence today, but it will be wholly suspended, and there will be a Good Behaviour Order for a period of 18 months from today, with a condition that you are to accept the supervision of the Director General of ACT Adult Corrections, or that person's delegate, for a period of 12 months, or such lesser period as deemed appropriate by your supervising officer. You are also, during that period of 12 months, to undertake such counselling or treatment as directed by the Director General, or that person's delegate.
17. With regard to the offence of dealing with the proceeds of crime, each of you will be convicted, and each of you will be sentenced to two months' imprisonment, which I have reduced from three months in order to reflect your pleas of guilty. Those sentences will be concurrent with the sentences that I have imposed for the offences relating to trafficking in a trafficable quantity of cannabis. Therefore with respect to that matter, it will be suspended forthwith and there will be a Good Behaviour Order for a period of six months, which will be subject only to the core conditions.
[Speaking directly to offenders]
18. I hope that both of you have learnt something from this. Both of you clearly have a lot of potential. Both of you have had some difficult times in growing up. You, Mr Lloyd, with respect to your diagnosis of epilepsy which has restricted the opportunities that you might otherwise have seen available to you, as a young man of 19.
19. You, Ms Norris, of course, have had a very unfortunate upbringing. So, both of you have been dealt some pretty bad cards. But really, the mark of a person is not so much what cards they're dealt, but how they play them. So, from here on in it is up to you to demonstrate that notwithstanding these issues you can avoid falling back into any crime. Because particularly any further involvement in drug trafficking will almost inevitably lead to a full-time term of imprisonment.
| I certify that the preceding nineteen [19] numbered paragraphs are a true copy of the Reasons for Sentence of his Honour Justice Burns. Associate: Date: 22 November 2018 |
0
0
2