R v Piukala; R v Taufahema - [2025] NSWDC 318

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Piukala; R v Taufahema [2025] NSWDC 318
Hearing dates: 8 August 2025
Date of orders: 15 August 2025
Decision date: 15 August 2025
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Newlinds SC DCJ
Decision:
(1)   After a 25% reduction for the early plea of guilty, the Offender, Mr Piukala, is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 22 months to date from 15 October 2024 and to expire on 14 August 2026.
(2)   There will be an aggregate non-parole period of 15 months which will expire on 14 January 2026, which is the first date the Offender will be eligible for release on parole.
(3)   After a 25% reduction for the early plea of guilty, the Offender, Ms Taufahema, is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 13 months to date from 1 June 2025 and to expire on 30 June 2026.
(4)   There will be an aggregate non-parole period of 6 months which will expire on 30 November 2025, which is the first date the Offender will be eligible for release on parole.

Catchwords:
CRIME – Drug offences – Supply prohibited drug – Large commercial quantity – Co-offenders operating small scale drug supply business – Involving various types of illicit drugs – Charged matters – Cannabis and psilocybin (“magic mushrooms”)
SENTENCING – Aggravating factors – Prior criminal history – Offences committed whilst on conditional liberty – Offences committed for financial reward
SENTENCING – Mitigating factors – Contrition and remorse – Prospects of rehabilitation – Significantly deprived upbringing engaging “Bugmy principle”
SENTENCING – Co-offenders – Parity – Co-offenders charged with same offences – Explanation for different sentences

Legislation Cited:
Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) s 3A; s 21A; s 25D(2)(a)
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) s 25(1); s 25(2)

Cases Cited:
Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571
Green v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462
Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120
Parente v R [2017] NSWCCA 284
R v Hamilton [20221 NSWDC 229
R v Jenkinson [2023] NSWDC 120
R v Qi [2019] NSWCCA 73
Robertson v R [2017] NSWCCA 205

Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Mr Piukala (First Co-offender)
Ms Taufahema (Second Co-offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr Stainer (Solicitor) (Crown)
Mr Hughes (First Co-offender)
Mr Kondich (Second Co-offender)
Solicitors:
ODPP (Crown)
Criminal Law Group (First Co-offender)
Karnib & Co Lawyers Pty Ltd (Second Co-offender)

File Number(s): 2024/5558; 2024/5573
Publication restriction: Nil

JUDGMENT

Introduction

In January 2024 Mr Piukala and Ms Taufahema had been in a relationship with each other for about 10 years.
They were both aged 30 and had extensive criminal histories which, whilst not identical, are similar. They were both addicted to illicit drugs and had been for some time.
In January 2024, they were arrested and charged with the same two offences. They both pleaded guilty at the same time and now stand to be sentenced.
Each of them has asked me to take into account the same series of matters to…

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.

Keep reading for free

Create a free CaseChat account to read R v Piukala; R v Taufahema and more:

Read every judgment in full
Ask AI and get answers linked to paragraphs
See how each paragraph was cited in later cases
Download judgments as PDF or Word

Continue with Google

One click creates your free account or signs you in.

By continuing you agree to the Terms and Privacy Policy.

Details

Case: [2025] NSWDC 318
Decision Date: 15 August 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of R v Piukala and R v Taufahema, the defendants were convicted of drug-related offences involving the supply of large quantities of illicit substances, including cannabis and psilocybin. The case was heard by the relevant court, which considered both aggravating and mitigating factors before passing sentence. The legal issues before the court involved the assessment of the defendants' criminal history, the timing of their offences, and their prospects of rehabilitation.

The court was required to consider several aggravating factors, including the prior criminal history of both defendants, the fact that the offences were committed while they were on conditional liberty, and the financial motivation behind the crimes. The court also considered mitigating factors such as the defendants' contrition and remorse, their prospects of rehabilitation, and their significantly deprived upbringings. The principle established in Bugmy v R was applied to give due weight to the defendants' disadvantaged backgrounds. The court had to balance these factors to ensure that the sentences were proportionate and fair.

In rendering its decision, the court noted that while both defendants were charged with similar offences and were co-offenders, their sentences differed due to varying degrees of culpability and mitigating factors. The court imposed a sentence on Mr Piukala of 22 months imprisonment, reduced by 25% for his early guilty plea, with a non-parole period of 15 months. For Ms Taufahema, the court imposed a sentence of 13 months imprisonment, also reduced by 25% for an early guilty plea, with a non-parole period of 6 months. These sentences reflect the court's consideration of both the gravity of the offences and the personal circumstances of each defendant.

The final orders of the court reflect the sentences imposed on the defendants, with specific dates set for their imprisonment terms and non-parole periods. Mr Piukala's imprisonment will commence on 15 October 2024 and expire on 14 August 2026, with eligibility for parole from 14 January 2026. Ms Taufahema's imprisonment will commence on 1 June 2025 and expire on 30 June 2026, with eligibility for parole from 30 November 2025.

Orders

Orders of the court

(1) After a 25% reduction for the early plea of guilty, the Offender, Mr Piukala, is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 22 months to date from 15 October 2024 and to expire on 14 August 2026.

(2) There will be an aggregate non-parole period of 15 months which will expire on 14 January 2026, which is the first date the Offender will be eligible for release on parole.

(3) After a 25% reduction for the early plea of guilty, the Offender, Ms Taufahema, is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 13 months to date from 1 June 2025 and to expire on 30 June 2026.

(4) There will be an aggregate non-parole period of 6 months which will expire on 30 November 2025, which is the first date the Offender will be eligible for release on parole.

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 Piukala; R v Taufahema [2025] NSWDC 318
Hearing dates:	8 August 2025
Date of orders:	15 August 2025
Decision date:	15 August 2025
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Newlinds SC DCJ
Decision:	(1) After a 25% reduction for the early plea of guilty, the Offender, Mr Piukala, is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 22 months to date from 15 October 2024 and to expire on 14 August 2026. (2) There will be an aggregate non-parole period of 15 months which will expire on 14 January 2026, which is the first date the Offender will be eligible for release on parole. (3) After a 25% reduction for the early plea of guilty, the Offender, Ms Taufahema, is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 13 months to date from 1 June 2025 and to expire on 30 June 2026. (4) There will be an aggregate non-parole period of 6 months which will expire on 30 November 2025, which is the first date the Offender will be eligible for release on parole.
Catchwords:	CRIME – Drug offences – Supply prohibited drug – Large commercial quantity – Co-offenders operating small scale drug supply business – Involving various types of illicit drugs – Charged matters – Cannabis and psilocybin (“magic mushrooms”) SENTENCING – Aggravating factors – Prior criminal history – Offences committed whilst on conditional liberty – Offences committed for financial reward SENTENCING – Mitigating factors – Contrition and remorse – Prospects of rehabilitation – Significantly deprived upbringing engaging “Bugmy principle” SENTENCING – Co-offenders – Parity – Co-offenders charged with same offences – Explanation for different sentences
Legislation Cited:	Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) s 3A; s 21A; s 25D(2)(a) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) s 25(1); s 25(2)
Cases Cited:	Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571 Green v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462 Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120 Parente v R [2017] NSWCCA 284 R v Hamilton [20221 NSWDC 229 R v Jenkinson [2023] NSWDC 120 R v Qi [2019] NSWCCA 73 Robertson v R [2017] NSWCCA 205
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Rex (Crown) Mr Piukala (First Co-offender) Ms Taufahema (Second Co-offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr Stainer (Solicitor) (Crown) Mr Hughes (First Co-offender) Mr Kondich (Second Co-offender) Solicitors: ODPP (Crown) Criminal Law Group (First Co-offender) Karnib & Co Lawyers Pty Ltd (Second Co-offender)
File Number(s):	2024/5558; 2024/5573
Publication restriction:	Nil