Citation: The Queen v Woodley [2020] NSWDC 664
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 15 September 2020
Judge(s): Wilson SC DCJ
Background
The offender, a 46-year-old man from The Entrance on the Central Coast, appeared for sentencing after pleading guilty to three counts of supplying a prohibited drug on an ongoing basis under s 25A of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). Police identified him during Strike Force Lamprey, an operation targeting methylamphetamine and other drug supply networks on the Central Coast, several of which involved known motorcycle gang members.
Between 31 May and 5 September 2019, the offender supplied methylamphetamine on at least 453 intercepted occasions, sourcing a total of 236 grams from three separate suppliers at an estimated street value of just under $120,000. He was also identified supplying cannabis, and is the brother of a Bandidos secretary, though there was no suggestion he held any formal role in that organisation.
At the time of offending, the offender was on conditional liberty under an Intensive Corrections Order (ICO) imposed for earlier drug supply and possession matters. That ICO was revoked after his arrest, and he served a fixed term before remaining in custody on the present charges.
Legal Issues
- Whether the custodial threshold under s 5 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) was crossed, requiring full-time imprisonment rather than a non-custodial or community-based sentence
- How to assess the offender's moral culpability, taking into account his history of addiction and diagnosed psychiatric conditions
- What weight to give mitigating factors, including the early guilty plea, his role as primary carer for his father, and his addiction background
- How to calculate the appropriate aggregate sentence across three principal charges, with additional Form 1 matters attached to two of them
- The proper commencement date for the sentence, given the complexity caused by the revocation of the earlier ICO and overlapping periods of custody
Decision
Wilson SC DCJ found that the s 5 threshold was clearly crossed. The volume of supply, the commercial motivation, the number of transactions, and the aggravating factor of offending while on conditional liberty all pointed firmly to full-time imprisonment. No submission was made that an Intensive Corrections Order was appropriate, and the court agreed such an order would not have been suitable.
On moral culpability, the court applied principles from Bugmy v The Queen and Dang v R, accepting that both the offender's long-standing addiction and his diagnosed psychiatric conditions reduced his moral culpability to some degree. The court drew on a psychiatric report by Dr Bench and noted that addiction can diminish freedom of choice, making a person less morally blameworthy than one who offends free of those constraints.
The early guilty plea attracted a 25% discount on each of the three indicative sentences. The court also acknowledged the offender's role as primary carer for his father as a mitigating circumstance, though the weight given to that factor was not separately quantified. Form 1 matters attached to Counts 1 and 3 were taken into account by giving greater weight to personal deterrence and retribution.
The court imposed an aggregate sentence, setting out indicative sentences of three years for Count 1, two years for Count 2, and three years for Count 3, each after the 25% discount. A number of additional sequences were withdrawn and dismissed. The court directed that Dr Bench's psychiatric report accompany the offender's warrant of commitment.
Orders Made
- The offender was convicted of three counts of supplying a prohibited drug on an ongoing basis (sequences 37, 38, and 39)
- An aggregate sentence was imposed comprising a non-parole period of 3 years commencing 5 December 2019, with a head sentence of 6 years
- The offender becomes eligible for parole on 4 December 2022
- Sequences 1 to 5, 7 to 12, 14 to 15, 17 to 22, 24 to 28, and 34 to 36 were withdrawn and dismissed
- The psychiatric report by Dr Bench dated 29 May 2020 was directed to accompany the offender's warrant of commitment
Key Takeaways
- The District Court confirmed that supplying methylamphetamine on an ongoing basis across hundreds of transactions, for commercial profit, firmly crosses the custodial threshold under s 5 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).
- Offending while subject to conditional liberty (such as an ICO) constitutes a statutory aggravating factor, and the revocation of that order also affects how pre-sentence custody is calculated.
- Under the principles in Bugmy v The Queen, long-standing drug addiction can reduce an offender's moral culpability, because addiction constrains freedom of choice, though it does not eliminate culpability altogether.
- An early guilty plea attracted a 25% discount across all three counts, illustrating how that utilitarian discount operates in the context of serious ongoing supply charges.
- Where Form 1 matters are taken into account, the sentencing court increases the penalty on principal charges by giving greater weight to personal deterrence and community retribution, rather than treating the Form 1 matters as separate punishable offences.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation:
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) ss 3A, 5
- Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) s 25A
Cases:
- Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 27
- Dang v R [2013] NSWCCA 246
- Regina v Parente [2017] NSWCCA 284
- Robertson v The Queen [2017] NSWCCA 205