AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
District Court 10 May 2024

R v Miller

[2024] NSWDC 169

Drugs

Citation: R v Miller [2024] NSWDC 169
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 10 May 2024
Judge: Scotting DCJ

Background

The offender, Scott Miller, appeared for sentencing after pleading guilty in the Local Court to supplying a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine (at least 504 grams) between April and October 2020, contrary to s 25(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. The offence carried a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and a standard non-parole period of 15 years. A related offence of participating in a criminal group under s 93T of the Crimes Act 1900 was placed on a Form 1 to be taken into account on sentence.

The offending arose from the offender's involvement with a drug supply network operating out of a rented safe house in Haberfield. Co-accused operating under pseudonyms stored, packaged, and distributed kilogram quantities of methylamphetamine from the premises. The offender held a key to the property, attended on at least 11 occasions, and collected at least 504 grams on credit for the purpose of on-supply to others.

The case was complicated by the fact that the offender had already been sentenced for separate matters by Hock DCJ in November 2022. His plea in the present matter had been delayed because he did not accept allegations made by one co-accused. The Crown ultimately accepted a factual basis for the plea that made it unnecessary to resolve that dispute.

  • What was the appropriate sentence for the principal offence, taking into account the standard non-parole period, the guilty plea discount, parity with co-accused, and the offender's rehabilitation?
  • What weight should be given to the offender's progress through the custodial system, including a Corrective Services NSW recommendation that no further rehabilitative benefit would be obtained from continued imprisonment?
  • How should the sentence interact with the earlier sentence imposed by Hock DCJ, given the delayed resolution of this matter?
  • Whether special circumstances existed justifying a departure from the standard ratio of non-parole period to head sentence.

Decision

Scotting DCJ applied a 25% discount to the sentence in recognition of the guilty plea entered in the Local Court, in accordance with s 25D(2)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. The judge adopted an undiscounted starting point of 5 years and 8 months imprisonment for the principal offence, noting this was lower than the starting points applied to co-accused Ms Vader (7 years) and Mr Clift (7 years and 8 months), consistent with the offender's lesser quantity of drugs and his overall culpability.

Parity was a significant consideration. Ms Vader and Mr Clift were sentenced on the basis of supplying at least 3 kilograms of methylamphetamine, compared to the offender's 504 grams. Scotting DCJ was required to maintain consistency with those sentences while also ensuring the result was proportionate to the offender's individual role and circumstances.

The judge found special circumstances, noting that had this matter been resolved in November 2022 it would have attracted partial accumulation on the existing sentence. Critically, Corrective Services NSW had recommended that no further rehabilitative benefit would be achieved by keeping the offender in custody. Scotting DCJ accepted that recommendation, observing it was rare for a court to be able to assess an offender at the end of their non-parole period. This informed the structuring of a very short non-parole period relative to the head sentence.

Taking into account the Form 1 offence and the guilty plea discount, the court imposed a term of 4 years and 3 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 1 year, commencing 16 May 2023. The practical effect was to increase the offender's overall head sentence by 12 months and non-parole period by 3 months, with the offender becoming eligible for parole on 15 May 2024.

Orders Made

  • The offender was convicted of supply of a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine contrary to s 25(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985.
  • A term of imprisonment of 4 years and 3 months was imposed, with a non-parole period of 1 year.
  • The sentence commenced 16 May 2023, with the non-parole period expiring 15 May 2024 and the head sentence expiring 15 August 2027.
  • The offence of participating in a criminal group (s 93T Crimes Act 1900) was taken into account on the Form 1.
  • The offender was declared eligible for release on parole on 15 May 2024.

Key Takeaways

  • Parity between co-offenders remains a central sentencing consideration: where co-accused were sentenced on the basis of a substantially larger drug quantity, a lower starting point for a defendant with lesser involvement was appropriate.
  • A guilty plea entered in the Local Court attracts a 25% sentence discount under s 25D(2)(a) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, even where the plea was delayed due to a factual dispute subsequently resolved by the Crown's acceptance of an agreed basis.
  • Special circumstances may be established where a sentencing delay means the matter would otherwise have been partially accumulated on an earlier sentence, justifying a disproportionately short non-parole period relative to the head sentence.
  • The District Court accepted that a Corrective Services NSW assessment, made at the end of the offender's non-parole period, constituted relevant evidence going to the structure of the sentence, particularly as to the utility of further custody for rehabilitation.
  • Under the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, courts must impose imprisonment only where satisfied no other penalty is appropriate, and the sentencing court must also account for proportionality and consistency with sentences already imposed on the same offender by another judge.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation
- Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), s 25(2)
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 93T
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 5, 25D(2)(a)

Cases
- Attorney General's Application No 1 of 2022 (2002) 56 NSWLR 147 (guideline judgment on Form 1 offences)
- R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270 (standard of proof applicable to factual findings on sentence)