Zohdy v The State of Western Australia

Zohdy was convicted of possessing 20.65 grams of MDMA and was sentenced to two years' imprisonment, to be served wholly in custody. Zohdy appealed against his sentence, contending it was manifestly excessive. The State of Western Australia opposed the appeal, arguing the sentence was appropriate. The case was heard in the Court of Appeal, where the central issue was whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive.

The court considered the nature and circumstances of the offence, the offender's background, and the principle of proportionality in sentencing. Zohdy's argument focused on the quantity of the drug, which he claimed was relatively small and unlikely to cause significant harm. However, the court emphasised the importance of deterrence and the need to protect the community from the harmful effects of drug trafficking. The court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive and that the primary judge had appropriately exercised their discretion in imposing the term of imprisonment.

Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and leave to appeal was refused. The original sentence of two years' imprisonment, to be served wholly in custody, was upheld. The court found that the sentence was within the range of penalties appropriate for the offence and did not consider it manifestly excessive.