AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
District Court 23 November 2018

R v Perry

[2018] NSWDC 434

Drugs
CRIMINAL LAW SENTENCE SUPPLY METHYLAMPHETAMINE DEAL WITH PROCEEDS OF CRIME POSSESS CANNABIS

Citation: R v Perry [2018] NSWDC 434
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 23 November 2018
Judge: Berman SC DCJ

Background

In February 2018, police attended a report of a man behaving erratically in public. Upon arrest, the accused was found to be under the influence of drugs. A search revealed 13.98 grams of methylamphetamine, $1,150 in cash, and a small quantity of cannabis.

The accused entered early guilty pleas to three offences: supplying methylamphetamine, dealing with property that was the proceeds of crime (the cash), and possessing cannabis. He appeared for sentencing having been held in custody on refused bail.

The sentencing judge received evidence about the accused's personal circumstances, with a particular focus on his history of drug dependence. The Crown pressed for a full-time custodial sentence, while the court considered whether an alternative approach better suited the circumstances.

  • Whether the accused should be sentenced immediately to a full-time custodial term, or whether the matter should be adjourned under section 11 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act to assess his rehabilitation prospects
  • What bail conditions, if any, were appropriate to attach to a section 11 remand
  • What weight should be given to the accused's drug dependency and prospects of rehabilitation in the sentencing exercise

Decision

The court found there was a genuine prospect the accused could address his drug dependency if given appropriate incentives and structured support. On that basis, the judge declined to impose sentence immediately and instead invoked section 11 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, adjourning sentencing to allow the accused's progress to be assessed.

The Crown opposed this course and submitted that a full-time custodial sentence was the appropriate outcome. The court acknowledged that position but noted that proceeding under section 11 would ultimately produce a better-informed sentencing decision: if the accused performed well on remand, that would weigh against full-time custody; if he performed poorly, a custodial sentence would follow as a certainty.

Bail was granted on strict conditions recorded in a document initialled by the judge. A twelfth condition was added orally, requiring the accused to make substantial efforts to engage in treatment or counselling programs and to attend a general practitioner within one week of release to arrange such programs.

The matter was listed for review on 7 March 2019, at which point the court indicated it would consider relaxing the bail conditions depending on the accused's progress. Final sentencing was scheduled for 9 May 2019.

Orders Made

  • Bail granted under section 11 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act on strict conditions as set out in a document initialled by the judge
  • An additional condition (condition 12) imposed, requiring the accused to make substantial effort to engage in treatment or counselling and to attend a general practitioner within one week of release
  • Matter adjourned to 7 March 2019 for review of bail conditions and assessment of progress
  • Sentencing adjourned to 9 May 2019

Key Takeaways

  • Under section 11 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, a sentencing court may adjourn proceedings and grant bail to assess an offender's rehabilitation prospects before imposing a final sentence, even where the Crown presses for immediate full-time custody.
  • The District Court treated the accused's drug dependency and genuine rehabilitation prospects as sufficient grounds to defer the sentencing determination, rather than proceeding directly to a custodial outcome.
  • A section 11 remand operates as a two-way mechanism: satisfactory progress reduces the likelihood of full-time imprisonment, while poor compliance effectively makes it inevitable.
  • Strict bail conditions, including a requirement to actively engage with drug treatment programs, can be imposed as part of a section 11 remand and may be reviewed and relaxed at a subsequent listing.
  • The court emphasised that the adjournment would produce a better-informed sentencing outcome, with the length of any custodial term also left to be determined in light of the accused's conduct during the remand period.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation:
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act (NSW), s 11

Cases cited:
None cited in the judgment text.