Winstead v The Queen

The applicant, Winstead, appealed against a sentence imposed by a sentencing judge following his plea of guilty to an offence under the Misuse of Drugs Act. The dispute concerned the severity of the sentence imposed for the warehousing of a significant quantity of cannabis.

The legal issues before the Court of Criminal Appeal were whether the sentencing judge erred in imposing a sentence that was manifestly excessive, and whether the sentencing judge correctly applied the presumption under subsection 37(6) of the Misuse of Drugs Act, which presumes an intention to supply for commercial gain when a commercial quantity of a dangerous drug is involved.

The Court considered the applicant's role in warehousing approximately 28.846 kilograms of cannabis, which was 58 times the commercial quantity. The sentencing judge noted that the applicant had a prior conviction for similar drug offences, for which he received a suspended sentence, and that this prior sentence had not acted as a sufficient deterrent. The judge also highlighted the importance of general deterrence given the substantial quantity of drugs involved and the applicant's failure to rebut the presumption of intent to supply for commercial gain. The applicant conceded he was involved in a commercial enterprise and did not challenge the facts presented by the police, including information that the drugs were sourced from South Australia and that the applicant's premises were one of two possible locations for the drugs. The applicant also did not provide further explanation or mitigating material, nor did he suggest he acted under compulsion or addiction.

The appeal was dismissed. The Court found that the sentencing judge had properly considered all relevant factors, including the applicant's criminal history, the presumption of intent to supply, and the need for both personal and general deterrence. The sentence imposed was not found to be manifestly excessive.