R v Scognamiglio

[2018] NSWDC 85

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Scognamiglio [2018] NSWDC 85
Hearing dates:	23rd February 2018
Date of orders:	23 February 2018
Decision date:	23 February 2018
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Berman SC DCJ
Decision:	The offender is sentenced to imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period of 1½ years with a head sentence of 3 years.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Ongoing drug supply
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	The Crown Frank Scognamiglio
Representation:	Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions – The Crown Legal Aid Commission – The Offender
File Number(s):	2017/91229

Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: In early 2017 police ran an operation in the Redfern area in an attempt to deal with the problems of drug supply. They had some success. I am to sentence a number of people who were arrested as a result of the police activities. Mr Scognamiglio is the second such person.

2. As part of the police operation they arranged for registered sources to purchase drugs from people willing and able to supply them. Mr Scognamiglio was one of them. He supplied drugs on four occasions to two of the registered sources. He supplied $900 worth of methylamphetamine for which Mr Scognamiglio got a small amount of drugs as a reward for facilitating the supply of that drug, the primary supplier being a Mr Lee. Then he supplied a further $900 worth of methylamphetamine; $1,750 worth of methylamphetamine; and finally, $1,400 worth of methylamphetamine for which the evidence reveals Mr Scognamiglio was paid $100. The quantities he supplied were significant, he receiving a total of $4,950 for having done so.

3. As I mentioned when sentencing another man today, Mr Lee, it is fortunate these drugs were not disseminated into the community given the harm that drug use causes. But, of course, Mr Scognamiglio was not to know that. As far as he was concerned he was supplying drugs to users who would use them, or on‑supply them. As far as he knew people were going to be harmed by his activities. Belatedly he recognises that he could have even killed someone through what he did.

4. Mr Scognamiglio has a criminal history, mainly in Queensland, involving offences which include supplying a prohibited plant and producing dangerous drugs. He was brought up in Queensland. He is the third of four children born to Italian migrants. His father worked as a crane operator. He died early unfortunately, aged only 55 years. There was no drug use at home, no domestic violence or criminality. He was well brought up.

5. The one exception to that description concerned the influence of his older brother. He developed a heroin dependency and later it was he who introduced Mr Scognamiglio to drugs. That was Mr Scognamiglio’s downfall. Up until then he had been doing well. He was working as a spray painter but drugs got in the way. He eventually stopped work and has not worked since he was in his 30s, he now being in his late 50s. He has lost contact with his family and is isolated both in the community, but especially in prison where he gets no visits or phone calls. He gets on well with the other inmates but has little contact with the outside world.

6. He has a lengthy history of drug use which was clearly persisting at the time that he committed the offence which I must sentence him, an offence of ongoing supply. He pleaded guilty to that offence at the earliest opportunity and so the sentence I impose upon him will be about 25% less than it would otherwise have been.

7. Objectively this offence is below the middle of the range. There were only four supplies covered by the ongoing supply offence although it has to be said that they were in quantities much greater than the usual street level dealer. Mr Scognamiglio acted as a runner, obtaining drugs from a variety of sources so that he could supply them to the registered sources.

8. Since going into gaol he says that he has not used drugs. That would be a significant factor if it were true, and indeed there is no suggestion that it is not true. There is no offence on Mr Scognamiglio’s custodial history of refusing urinalysis or failing urinalysis. It would be good for everyone, including of course Mr Scognamiglio, if he could continue to abstain from the use of drugs upon his release from custody. No-one is going to suggest that that would be easy for him to do and he will need a substantial level of support if that is to take place. Frankly Mr Scognamiglio must be getting a bit too old for this. I hope that he looks forward to the rest of his life outside gaol and does everything he can to ensure that that is what will happen.

9. I will make a finding of special circumstances in his favour in order to do what I can to promote Mr Scognamiglio’s rehabilitation and to try and keep him off drugs once he is released from gaol. If he is able to do that, he will lead a happier life and the community will benefit as well.

10. I impose sentence as follows: I set a non-parole period of one and a half years and a head sentence of three years to date from 24 March 2017, the date of Mr Scognamiglio’s arrest. The non‑parole period will expire on 23 September 2018, on which day Mr Scognamiglio is to be released to parole.

11. Sequences 1 and 2 on the s 166 certificate are withdrawn and therefore dismissed.

**********

Decision last updated: 09 April 2018