R v Newton - [2020] NSWDC 806

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Newton [2020] NSWDC 806
Hearing dates: 31 March 2020
Date of orders: 31 March 2020
Decision date: 31 March 2020
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Judge W Hunt
Decision:
Taking into account matters on a Form 1 the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 2 years to be served by means of an ICO. As well as the standard conditions of the ICO there will be an additional condition that the offender perform 300 hours community service

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Supply commercial quantity of prohibited drug – MDMA – Form 1- Limited role of offender

Legislation Cited:
Drug (Misuse and Trafficking) Act, 1995

Category: Sentence
Parties: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions
Darcy Newton
Representation: Ms A Bowens – The Crown
Mr Thomson – The Offender

File Number(s): 2018/393366

SENTENCE

HIS HONOUR: Darcy Newton is before the Court for sentence in relation to one principal count; being a supply commercial quantity of a prohibited drug; being MDMA in breach of s 25(2) of the Drug (Misuse and Trafficking) Act, 1995. That matter has a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment and a standard non-parole period of ten years. Additionally, the parties asked me to take into account two other supply commercial quantity offences which would carry the same penalty on indictment. It is inevitable that taking those two matters into account will place upward pressure on the penalty otherwise to be imposed on the principal count.
The facts are agreed in relation to both the principal count and the two matters on the Form 1. On 14 August 2018 a witness asked Shannon Wylie to supply with him “another 500” by the evening of 17 August 2018. Wylie told the witness he would know if he could do that by the next day. On 15 August 2018 Mr Potter, who is also a co-offender and somebody known to this offender, and Wylie had a conversation during which they organised for Wylie to attend Potter’s residence the next day. Immediately after this conversation Wylie rang the witness and said, “You're guaranteed the same things as last time”, and they agreed to meet the next day at 4pm on 16 August 2018.
At 1.30pm on 16 August 2018 the witness sent Wylie a Snapchat that confirmed being available for 4.30, “with papers” - which I take to be a reference to having cash to undertake the transaction. Wylie confirmed that arrangement.
At around 5pm that day the witness met with Wylie at the Matilda Service Station in Armidale. He provided him with $7,500 worth of pre‑recorded money in a brown paper bag for the purpose of purchasing MDMA.
At 8.40 on 16 August 2108 this offender and Wylie parked their separate vehicles across the road from Potter’s residence in Neath. They were standing outside the vehicle with Potter shortly afterwards. The offender drove away and police lost track of him until later in the evening when…

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 Newton

Details

AGLC: R v Newton [2020] NSWDC 806
Case: [2020] NSWDC 806
Decision Date: 31 March 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case before the court involved the respondent, Newton, who had been found guilty of supplying a commercial quantity of a prohibited drug, specifically MDMA. The matter was heard and determined by the Supreme Court of Victoria. The prosecution sought a sentence that would reflect the seriousness of the offence, while the defence argued for a sentence that would take into account the limited role of Newton in the supply chain.

The primary legal issues before the court were the appropriate sentencing principles to apply in this case, and the weight to be given to the mitigating factors presented by the defence. The court had to consider the principles of general deterrence, specific deterrence, denunciation, and rehabilitation, as well as the particular circumstances of Newton's involvement in the offence. The defence argued that Newton's role was limited, and that he had cooperated with the authorities, which should be taken into account in determining an appropriate sentence.

The court acknowledged the seriousness of the offence and the need for general and specific deterrence. However, it also considered the mitigating factors presented by the defence, including Newton's limited role in the supply chain, his cooperation with the authorities, and his otherwise good character. The court determined that an imprisonment sentence was appropriate, but that the imposition of an Intensive Corrections Order (ICO) would provide an opportunity for Newton to contribute to the community and potentially rehabilitate. The court also imposed an additional condition that Newton perform 300 hours of community service as part of his ICO.

Orders

Orders of the court

Taking into account matters on a Form 1 the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 2 years to be served by means of an ICO. As well as the standard conditions of the ICO there will be an additional condition that the offender perform 300 hours community service

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Newton [2020] NSWDC 806
Hearing dates:	31 March 2020
Date of orders:	31 March 2020
Decision date:	31 March 2020
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge W Hunt
Decision:	Taking into account matters on a Form 1 the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 2 years to be served by means of an ICO. As well as the standard conditions of the ICO there will be an additional condition that the offender perform 300 hours community service
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Supply commercial quantity of prohibited drug – MDMA – Form 1- Limited role of offender
Legislation Cited:	Drug (Misuse and Trafficking) Act, 1995
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions Darcy Newton
Representation:	Ms A Bowens – The Crown Mr Thomson – The Offender
File Number(s):	2018/393366