R v Smith; R v Campbell - [2018] NSWDC 293

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Smith; R v Campbell [2018] NSWDC 293
Hearing dates: 6 April 2018
Decision date: 08 June 2018
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Bright DCJ
Decision:
Smith – Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate sentence of 11 years.
Campbell – Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate sentence of eight and a half years.
Catchwords: Manufacture commercial quantity prohibited drugs, possess precursor with intent to manufacture, possess more than 3 unregistered firearms in aggravated circumstances.
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985
Firearms Act 1996
Road Transport Act 2013
Cases Cited: Attorney-General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, No 1 of 2002, [2002] 56 NSWLR 146
Melikian v R [2008] NSWCCA 156
R v MacDonnell (2002) 12 ACrimR 44
Taylor v R [2018] NSWCCA 50
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Sean Anthony Smith (Offender)
Simon Vincent Campbell (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr B Costello
Ms Francis for Mr Campbell
Mr Pontello for Mr Smith
Solicitors:
Mr Croke for Mr Campbell
Mr Pham for Mr Smith

File Number(s): 2015/00127728, 2015/00222896, 2015/00029985, 2015/00127720, 2015/00235660

sentence

HER HONOUR: These are my remarks on sentence in relation to the matters of Sean Anthony Smith, also known as Sean Steel, and Simon Vincent Campbell.
Sean Anthony Smith, (born in 1968, 49 years), and Simon Vincent Campbell, (born in 1974, 44 years), appear for sentence in relation to offences arising as a result of a police operation named ‘Operation Hobbit’ established by police Strike Force Raptor to investigate the activities of the offenders who were suspected to be involved in the manufacture of prohibited drugs, namely, methylamphetamine.
The offender Smith appears for sentence in relation to the following offences:

1. H06367383/1, manufacture commercial quantity of methylamphetamine, 641 grams an offence pursuant to s 24(2), Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act. The maximum prescribed penalty for that offence is 20 years’ imprisonment. There is a prescribed standard non-parole period of ten years’ imprisonment.

When dealing with the offender for that offence three further matters are to be taken into account on a Form 1 as follows: possess prohibited drug, methylamphetamine, 1.53 grams, (H6367383/6); supply prohibited drug, methylamphetamine, 19.72 grams, (H6367383/7); and conduct drug premises (H6367383/12).

2. H 06367383/3, possess precursor, 18.5 kilograms of hypophosphorous acid, with intent to manufacture prohibited drug, an offence pursuant to s 24A (1)(a) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act. The maximum prescribed penalty for that offence is ten years’ imprisonment. There is no prescribed standard non-parole period.

When dealing with the offender Smith for that offence the Court is taking into account two further matters on a Form 1 as follows: possess precursor being 6.966 kilograms of iodine, (H6367383/2); and possess instructions to manufacture, (H6367383/8).

3. H06367383/13, supply prohibited drug, commercial quantity, methylamphetamine, 993 grams, an offence pursuant to s 25 (2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act. The maximum prescribed penalty for that offence in 20 years’ imprisonment. There…

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 Smith; R v Campbell

Details

AGLC: R v Smith; R v Campbell [2018] NSWDC 293
Case: [2018] NSWDC 293
Decision Date: 08 June 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of R v Smith; R v Campbell, the defendants were charged with offences under the Dangerous Drugs Act and the Firearms Act. Both Smith and Campbell were found to be in possession of precursor chemicals intended for the manufacture of prohibited drugs, with Smith additionally charged with manufacturing commercial quantities of such drugs. Both defendants were also charged with possessing more than three unregistered firearms in circumstances that were considered aggravated. The court was tasked with determining the guilt of the defendants on these charges and, if found guilty, to determine an appropriate sentence.

The legal issues before the court included whether the evidence presented was sufficient to establish the defendants' intent to manufacture prohibited drugs and whether the possession of precursor chemicals and firearms constituted an offence under the relevant statutes. The court had to consider the specific language of the statutes, the weight of the evidence, and the circumstances surrounding each defendant's actions. Additionally, the court examined the aggravating factors relevant to the firearms charges, such as the potential threat to public safety posed by the possession of unregistered firearms.

The court found that the evidence was compelling and demonstrated the defendants' intent and actions to manufacture and possess prohibited substances and unregistered firearms. The court found that the statutory language was clear and the defendants' activities fell squarely within the prohibited activities. The court further considered the aggravating circumstances related to the firearms, including the potential harm to the community. After considering the totality of the circumstances, the court determined that the defendants were guilty of the charges against them. In sentencing, the court took into account the seriousness of the offences, the intent behind the actions, and the need for deterrence and rehabilitation.

The final orders of the court were that Smith was convicted and sentenced to an aggregate sentence of 11 years, and Campbell was convicted and sentenced to an aggregate sentence of eight and a half years. The sentences reflected the severity of the offences and the court's aim to balance punishment with the need for public safety and deterrence.

Orders

Orders of the court

Smith – Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate sentence of 11 years.

Campbell – Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate sentence of eight and a half years.

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 Smith; R v Campbell [2018] NSWDC 293
Hearing dates:	6 April 2018
Decision date:	08 June 2018
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Bright DCJ
Decision:	Smith – Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate sentence of 11 years. Campbell – Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate sentence of eight and a half years.
Catchwords:	Manufacture commercial quantity prohibited drugs, possess precursor with intent to manufacture, possess more than 3 unregistered firearms in aggravated circumstances.
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 Firearms Act 1996 Road Transport Act 2013
Cases Cited:	Attorney-General’s Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, No 1 of 2002, [2002] 56 NSWLR 146 Melikian v R [2008] NSWCCA 156 R v MacDonnell (2002) 12 ACrimR 44 Taylor v R [2018] NSWCCA 50
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Sean Anthony Smith (Offender) Simon Vincent Campbell (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr B Costello Ms Francis for Mr Campbell Mr Pontello for Mr Smith Solicitors: Mr Croke for Mr Campbell Mr Pham for Mr Smith
File Number(s):	2015/00127728, 2015/00222896, 2015/00029985, 2015/00127720, 2015/00235660