R v White - [1992] QCA 142

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL [1992] QCA 142

SUPREME COURT OF QUEENSLAND

C.A. No. 56 of 1992
T H E Q U E E N

v.

ROBERT GORDON WHITE
(Applicant)

JUDGMENT - THE COURT

Delivered the Eleventh day of June 1992

This is an application for leave to appeal against sentence. The appellant, who is 29 years of age, was convicted before Thomas J. on an indictment containing four counts; he pleaded guilty. The first was that between 21 November 1990 and 5 April 1991, the applicant carried on the business of unlawfully trafficking in dangerous drugs, namely methylamphetamine, amphetamine, T.H.C. and cannabis sativa. The other three counts were treated by the judge as relatively minor and, we think, rightly so; each was a charge of having unlawfully supplied a dangerous drug: two of lysergide and the third cannabis sativa. These lesser offences each attracted a sentence of one month's imprisonment, to be served concurrently with the sentence imposed in respect of trafficking, which was three years. The applicant's complaint is directed to the sentence on the major offence.

Before Thomas J., the Crown said that it relied upon "numerous transactions over an extended period of time in 1990 and 1991". According to counsel for the respondent before us, there were eleven transactions in all and, as far as can be discerned from the record, that appears to be correct. These transactions may be summarised as follows.

1.Methylamphetamine: seven transactions of which five involved sale for amounts varying between $1,300 and $1,500 each, one was at $600 and the last at $450.

2.Cannabis sativa: three transactions of which the first was at $20, the second was a small transaction with no consideration stated and the third was at $20.

3.Hashish:the applicant offered the substance at $600 per ounce, but no transaction was completed.

The transactions occurred between the applicant and an undercover police officer. The applicant's case is that the police officer pestered him to sell drugs; he claimed before us that the officer put forward a story to the effect that he was desperately in need of funds, in order to induce the applicant to obtain drugs and sell them to him. However, the applicant admitted that at one stage he made what he called a "bit of a sales pitch" to the police officer. He said to the police officer that "between four of us we got rid of four pounds over five weeks" - meaning four pounds of methylamphetamine. It should be noted, however, that each so-called "ounce" seems to have contained about 1½ grams of methylamphetamine. Further, the applicant asserted that the statement we have just quoted was not true. He explained that he wanted to sell amphetamines because he was at the time using them himself and used take small amounts from each quantity sold; he claimed that that was his return in each transaction, which was not engaged in for the purpose of commercial gain.

The facts appear to be that the applicant was…

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 White

Details

AGLC: R v White [1992] QCA 142
Case: [1992] QCA 142
Decision Date: 11 June 1992

CaseChat Overview and Summary

This appeal concerns an application for leave to appeal against sentence. The appellant, Robert Gordon White, was convicted of trafficking in dangerous drugs, among other offences. The primary judge, Thomas J., sentenced the appellant to three years imprisonment for trafficking, with concurrent sentences of one month imprisonment for the other charges. The appellant's primary contention is that the sentence on the major offence was too harsh. The Court of Appeal considered whether the sentence was appropriate given the appellant's clean criminal record, the relatively small commercial gain from the offences, and the influence of an undercover police officer.

The Court of Appeal examined the nature and extent of the appellant's involvement in drug trafficking, which included several transactions involving methylamphetamine and small quantities of marijuana. The Court noted that the appellant had not engaged in significant drug dealing outside these transactions and that the offences were largely driven by his addiction to amphetamines and the solicitations of the undercover police officer. The Court compared the appellant's case with similar cases where recommendations for early parole were made, such as Cuddy, Newnham, and Bennett. The Court concluded that the appellant's circumstances warranted a recommendation for parole eligibility after nine months, considering his lack of a prior criminal record, his cooperation with the police, and his voluntary cessation of drug dealing before his arrest.

In light of the circumstances, the Court of Appeal granted the application for leave to appeal and allowed the appeal to the extent of recommending that the appellant be eligible for release on parole after serving nine months of his sentence. The Court emphasised that the primary judge had not erred in imposing the sentence but that the appellant's unique circumstances justified a recommendation for early parole. The Court acknowledged the appellant's addiction and the undue influence of the undercover police officer, which played a significant role in his criminal conduct.

Orders