R v Pearce

[2020] QSC 114

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

CITATION:	R v Pearce [2020] QSC 114
PARTIES:	R
(Crown)
v NATHAN JAMES PEARCE
(accused)
FILE NO:	Indictment No 527 of 2019
DIVISION:	Trial Division
PROCEEDING:	Sentence
ORIGINATING	Supreme Court at Brisbane
COURT:
DELIVERED ON:	13 May 2020
DELIVERED AT:	Brisbane
HEARING DATE:	17 and 24 April 2020
JUDGE:	Davis J
ORDER:	Findings as appear in the reasons.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE – SENTENCING PROCEDURE – FACTUAL BASIS FOR SENTENCE – EVIDENCE – GENERALLY – where accused pleaded guilty

to one count of possessing a dangerous drug in excess of two grams and one count of possessing a dangerous drug in excess

of 200 grams – where there is dispute as to what inferences ought to be drawn from the facts – where the Crown sought to

prove that the accused was the beneficial owner of the methylamphetamine and cocaine and therefore the principal of

the commercial enterprise – where the accused sought to categorise his possession as in the capacity of a courier –

whether the inference should be drawn that the accused was the beneficial owner of the methylamphetamine and cocaine and intended to commercially apply the methylamphetamine and cocaine

CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCE – SENTENCING PROCEDURE – FACTUAL BASIS FOR SENTENCE – EVIDENCE – GENERALLY – where accused pleaded guilty

to one count of producing a dangerous drug in excess of two

grams – where there is dispute as to what inferences ought to be drawn from the facts – where the Crown sought to prove

that the accused physically produced the gamma hydroxybutyric acid (GHB) and that it was possessed by the

accused for a commercial purpose – whether the inference

should be drawn that the accused was the beneficial owner of
the GHB and personally produced the GHB and intended to

commercially apply the GHB for the benefit of himself

Criminal Code, s 205A
Drugs Misuse Act 1986, s 4, s 5, s 6, s 7, s 9, s 10, s 10A, s 14
Evidence Act 1977, s 132C

Police Powers and Responsibilities Act 2000, s 154, s 154A

Briginshaw v Briginshaw (1938) 60 CLR 336, cited
Clare v R [1994] 2 Qd R 619, followed
R v Boney; ex parte Attorney-General (Qld) [1986] 1 Qd R
190, cited
R v D [1996] 1 Qd R 363, cited
R v De Simoni (1981) 147 CLR 383, followed
R v Van Huynh [2003] QCA 371, cited
R v Jobson [1989] 2 Qd R 464, cited
R v Kovacs [2009] QCA 52, cited
R v Morrison [1999] 1 Qd R 397, cited
R v Nardozzi [1995] 2 Qd R 87, cited
R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270, followed
R v Ta [2018] QCA 342, cited
Savvas v The Queen (1995) 183 CLR 1, followed
Shepherd v The Queen (1990) 170 CLR 573, cited

Strbak v The Queen (2020) 94 ALJR 374, followed

COUNSEL:  TL Corsbie for the Crown
AJ Kimmins for…