R v Mullins

[2019] NSWDC 379

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Mullins [2019] NSWDC 379
Hearing dates:	12 February 2019
Decision date:	12 February 2019
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Colefax SC DCJ
Decision:	Set aside s.9 bond - Imprisonment for 18 months with a non parole period of 13 months.
Catchwords:	CRIME - SENTENCE - supply prohibited drug
Legislation Cited:	Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Jack Mullins (Offender)
Representation:	Ms Martin (ODPP) Ms Haywood (Offender)
File Number(s):	2016/106388
Publication restriction:	Nil

​Judgment

1. Jack Mullins, you appear before the Court today on the call up of the s 9 bond which was imposed upon you by another Judge of the Court on 23 March 2017.  On that occasion, his Honour sentenced you for supplying a prohibited drug, not being cannabis. 

2. This involved a contravention of s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). The maximum penalty for that offence is 15 years' imprisonment.

3. You have admitted breaching that bond. His Honour has directed that any Judge of this Court can call-up bond. I set it aside.

4. The circumstances surrounding the offending were set out in some detail by his Honour, supplemented by the agreed statement of facts. 

5. It is not necessary for me this afternoon to repeat what his Honour had to say.  What his Honour said is incorporated by reference.  Suffice to say, though, that you were found in possession of 14.27 grams of methylamphetamine with a purity of 80.5% on 7 April 2016.

6. Whilst his Honour observed that he did not regard it as a particularly serious example of the offence of supply, with great respect to his Honour, I disagree with his conclusion that the s 5 threshold was not crossed.  That quantity of that drug with that purity is a matter of concern.  True it is, it would seem on the material, that you were not selling it - but you were distributing it.  It was not just for your own personal use; you were making it available to others.  The fact that you were not paid for it, to an extent reduces the criminality but, nevertheless, you were distributing it into the community. This Court sees, on a daily basis, the consequence of people being exposed to methylamphetamine.  It is an insidious drug and you were a willing participant in distributing it in the local community.

7. Whilst it is an offence towards the bottom of the range for an offence of its kind, it does cross the s 5 threshold - that is, no sentence other than a period of imprisonment is appropriate. 

8. Your subjective circumstances are again set out at some length in his Honour's remarks - which are also incorporated by reference. 

9. Since that time, you have completely failed to engage with community corrections. You preferred to work and make money than to address your continuing drug problem. 

10. You have told me that you went to a rehabilitation course in Tweed Heads but you did not complete it, and you have not attempted any other course. 

11. The fact that you tell me today that you still need to have rehabilitation, and you now intend to enter a rehabilitation centre in Sydney, almost 2 years after you were sentenced by his Honour, indicates that you are still using drugs.  You do not need to go to a rehabilitation centre if you are not using drugs, so you are still using them.

12. Considering the passage of time from when his Honour sentenced you to today, and considering what you have not done, your prospects for rehabilitation must be guarded. 

13. You have a criminal history in which you have served previous periods of imprisonment. I am not persuaded on the balance of probabilities that your prospects of rehabilitation would be enhanced by a longer period on parole.  And, notwithstanding your age, I am not going to make a finding of special circumstances to vary the ratio of the head sentence to the non-parole period. In your case, both specific deterrence (that is, imposing a sentence that will discourage you from re‑offending) and general deterrence (that is, imposing a sentence which will discourage others from doing what you have done) are fully engaged.

14. His Honour made a finding of a 10% discount for the late plea. I shall adopt that finding. 

15. Except for your plea of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a term of imprisonment of 20 months.  Because of the 10% discount, the term of imprisonment is 18 months to date from today.

16. I have considered whether the sentence should be served by means of an Intensive Corrections Order. Given your failure to engage with Corrective Services, I have decided not to order that the sentence be served by that means.

17. I fix a non-parole period of 13 months to date from today.  You will be eligible for parole, therefore, on 11 March 2020.

18. You will now go with the officers, thank you.

Decision last updated: 07 August 2019