R v Williams

[1996] QCA 309

[1996] QCA 309

COURT OF APPEAL
DERRINGTON J
MACKENZIE J

WHITE J

CA No 123 of 1996
THE QUEEN
v.

DESMOND LESTER WILLIAMS Applicant

BRISBANE
..DATE 31/07/96
310796 T11/SJ M/T COA174/96
DERRINGTON J: The applicant has failed to appear and the
respondent, the Crown, has sought to have the application struck
out. By way of precaution I would say that the Court has
examined the papers in this matter in anticipation of the
possibility that the applicant might not appear, as was
forewarned.

He is 24 years of age and was sentenced to three years and six months imprisonment with a recommendation for parole after 18 months on a count of trafficking in cannabis sativa and methyl amphetamine.

The evidence suggests strongly that he had both a readiness and a capacity to supply drugs. Although the quantities and the amounts of money involved in his dealings with the undercover agent were relatively small, and although he might be regarded as being at the lower end in the scale of trafficking, it should not be thought that his activities were confined to those dealings which he had with the undercover agent. He has prior convictions but so far as this type of offence is concerned, the four offences of that nature were confined to his possession of drugs. He does have convictions in addition to those; one of dishonesty and one of violence.

The dealings, it should be noted, were not confined to cannabis but included methyl amphetamine and it is said that the deal involved in that comprised some five bags involving a pure weight of 1.839 grams of the substance.

310796 T11/SJ M/T COA174/96
In those circumstances, it is my view that the appeal had little
prospects of success taking into account the recommendation for

early parole relating to the applicant's timely plea of guilty.

MACKENZIE J: I agree.

WHITE J: I agree. I would indicate that on the material before the Court that three and a half years imprisonment could be regarded as on the high side for trafficking of this kind notwithstanding the inference that was clearly and properly drawn by the learned sentencing Judge that other commercial activities had taken place apart from those with the police undercover agent but when that is coupled with the early recommendation parole after 18 months, in my view, it was not manifestly excessive and an appeal, had it been correctly conducted by the applicant, would not enjoy any real prospects of success. I agree with the orders proposed by the learned presiding Judge.

DERRINGTON J: The application is struck out.

-----