R v Palmieri

[2012] NSWDC 279

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Palmieri [2012] NSWDC 279
Hearing dates:	23 March 2012.
Decision date:	23 March 2012
Before:	Berman SC DCJ
Decision:	Sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 2 years. Suspended under s 12 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW - Sentence - supply prohibited drug - methylamphetamine
Legislation Cited:	Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	The Crown Warren Palmieri
Representation:	Mr G Jauncey - for the offender Director of Public Prosecutions
File Number(s):	2011/88270

SENTENCE

1. HIS HONOUR: Warren Palmieri pleaded guilty, at a somewhat late stage, to an offence of supplying a prohibited drug. Despite living up near Newcastle he was found at 3 o'clock in the morning at Artarmon. He drew attention to himself through his manner of driving. Police stopped the vehicle and when Mr Palmieri passed a roadside breath test police formed the not unnatural opinion that he may have been influenced by drugs. His behaviour was suspicious so they searched the car and discovered a bag containing white crystals. They also discovered a number of smaller resealable bags with a residue of crystal, some notebooks, and more than one mobile phone, with the notebooks containing what were later admitted to be drug ledgers. The white crystal powder was weighed and its purity assessed. There was 6.89 grams of methylamphetamine with a purity of seventy-three per cent.

1. For a while the accused maintained that the drugs were all for his own use. Indeed, he told the Probation and Parole Service that as they were preparing a pre-sentence report. But the accused now admits that some of those drugs were to be sold.

1. The offender was born in 1964, so he is getting a bit old for this. He has had a problem with drugs for many years, although he does not really, I think, recognise it. He in fact was on bail for driving whilst under the influence of drugs at the time of this offence and he committed another offence of a similar kind in more recent times. The offender seems to think that because he can work at the same time as using drugs then things are okay. I doubt very much that he recognises the danger he represents to the community, his family and himself. Indeed, the evidence would suggest that his partner developed psychosis through her amphetamine use. This has led to her losing the custody of her own children. Yet still the offender does not seem to understand how dangerous these drugs are. I am satisfied that there is in this case a significant component of personal deterrence required.

1. The offender, as I said, was born in 1964. He went into his father's business of concreting and has constantly been employed over the years. References from employers were tendered in Court today and they speak highly of him. I mentioned before that the offender's partner has lost custody of her children. They are cared for by either her parents or his…