Roland v Tasmania

In *Roland v Tasmania*, the Court of Criminal Appeal of Tasmania considered appeals against convictions and sentences for drug trafficking offences. The appellant, Roland, was convicted of trafficking in controlled substances, and appealed both his conviction and the sentence imposed.

The primary legal issues before the Court were the admissibility of certain evidence, specifically evidence relating to the appellant's possession of firearms, and whether the sentence of three years' imprisonment with an 18-month non-parole period was manifestly inadequate. The admissibility of the firearms evidence was contested on the grounds of propensity and relevance, particularly in light of a previous acquittal on a charge related to firearms.

The Court held that the evidence of the appellant's possession of firearms was relevant and admissible. It reasoned that the previous acquittal on a firearms charge did not preclude the admission of evidence of later possession of firearms, as the acquittal did not controvert the fact of possession. The Court further found that the sentence imposed was not manifestly inadequate, given the appellant's role as a dealer in the business of selling various drugs to users over approximately three years.

Consequently, both appeals, Appeal 1591/2015 and Appeal 1525/2015, were dismissed.