SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND
CITATION:
R v Welch [2004] QCA 108
PARTIES:
R
v
WELCH, Prem Chilan(applicant)
FILE NO/S:
CA No 412 of 2003
SC No 48 of 2003
DIVISION:
Court of Appeal
PROCEEDING:
Sentence Application
ORIGINATING COURT:
Supreme Court at Cairns
DELIVERED EX TEMPORE ON:
13 April 2004
DELIVERED AT:
Brisbane
HEARING DATE:
13 April 2004
JUDGES:
McMurdo P, McPherson JA and Holmes J
Separate reasons for judgment of each member of the Court, each concurring as to the order made.
ORDER:
Application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed.
CATCHWORDS:
CRIMINAL LAW- JURISDICTION, PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE – JUDGMENT AND PUNISHMENT – SENTENCE – FACTORS TO BE TAKEN INTO ACCOUNT – CIRCUMSTANCES OF THE OFFENCE –where the appellant pleaded guilty to possession of cocaine with a circumstance of aggravation, the quantity of the drug being 39.1 grams – where the learned sentencing judge found that the possession was for a commercial purpose – whether the sentencing judge erred in reaching the conclusion that the cocaine was possessed for a commercial purpose
Darren Gaven (Indictment No 297 of 2001), distinguished
R v Ioan Ban [1992] QCA 98; CA No 33 of 1992, 13 May 1992, distinguishedR v Jenkins [1999] QCA 447; CA No 148 of 1999, 27 of October 1999, considered
COUNSEL:
The appellant appeared on his own behalf
B G Campbell for the respondent
SOLICITORS:
The appellant appeared on his own behalf
Director of Public Prosecutions (Queensland) for the respondent.
HOLMES J: The applicant for leave to appeal against sentence was sentenced to three years' imprisonment for possession of cocaine with a circumstance of aggravation, the quantity of the drug being 39.1 grams.
The learned sentencing Judge found that the possession was for a commercial purpose. He took into account a timely plea of guilty (a plea was entered at the committal proceedings) and the absence of any prior convictions as at the date of arrest. The applicant did have one conviction subsequent to his arrest. He had pleaded guilty to possession of a small amount of cannabis and of utensils and was dealt with by way of a fine in the Magistrate's Court.
He was 22 and was described as unemployed when the offence was committed, but he had worked as a casual labourer. He was 24 years of age at sentence. The applicant contends that the learned sentencing Judge erred in reaching the conclusion that the drugs were possessed by him for a commercial purpose. He asserts there was no evidence to support that conclusion.
The cocaine, the subject of the charge, was found in a pencil case inside a bag belonging to the applicant upon a police search of a motel room in Cairns occupied by the applicant and his girlfriend. The applicant was not there at the time but arrived later. A search of his person found $3,100 in cash in a bag in his underpants. Another person in his company had $5,350 on him.
The applicant had arrived at the…
Continue reading R v Welch
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- R v Welch [2004] QCA 108
- Case
- [2004] QCA 108
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
The central legal issue in this case was whether the sentencing judge erred in concluding that the cocaine was possessed for a commercial purpose. The appellant argued that the evidence did not sufficiently support this conclusion and that the sentence imposed was excessive. The court needed to determine whether the judge had correctly applied the relevant legal principles in reaching the conclusion that the possession was for commercial purposes.
In reviewing the decision, the court examined the evidence presented and the judge's reasoning. The court found that the sentencing judge had appropriately considered the relevant factors, including the quantity of the drug and the circumstances of the offence. The court determined that the judge had not erred in concluding that the possession was for commercial purposes, given the substantial amount of cocaine involved. Consequently, the application for leave to appeal against the sentence was dismissed. The court upheld the original sentence imposed by the sentencing judge, affirming that the judge had correctly applied the legal principles and reached a reasonable conclusion based on the evidence presented.
Orders
Orders of the court
Application for leave to appeal against sentence dismissed.
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.