Citation: R v Faria [2025] NSWDC 80
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 21 March 2025
Judge: Noman SC DCJ
Background
The offender, a 46-year-old man, was found by police at a residential unit in the process of attempting to extract cocaine impregnated in rubber. Officers had attended after receiving a complaint about a smell emanating from the property. The offender was caught in the act and admitted his conduct to police, stating he had been involved for approximately one week and was to be paid $10,000 for his role.
The total pure weight of cocaine identified across several items was 782 grams, placing the offending within the commercial quantity range of 250 grams to 1 kilogram under the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). The offender also possessed detailed written instructions, supplemented by his own handwritten notes, for carrying out the extraction process.
The offender was not a drug user. He was homeless and impecunious at the time, and the court accepted he became involved out of financial need rather than greed. He had no significant prior criminal history, holding only a minor driving offence.
Legal Issues
- Whether the principal offence of knowingly taking part in the manufacture of a commercial quantity of a prohibited drug warranted a sentence of full-time imprisonment or could appropriately be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order (ICO)
- The appropriate sentence for the related offence of possessing instructions to manufacture a prohibited drug
- Whether the offender's conduct in admitting involvement when caught in the act constituted assistance to authorities warranting a separate sentencing discount
- The appropriate weight to be given to the offender's guilty plea, personal circumstances, remorse, and prospects of rehabilitation
Decision
The District Court found the offending was a relatively serious example of the relevant offence provision, rejecting the submission that it fell at the lower end of objective seriousness. The offender played an important and entrusted role, handling chemicals and equipment to extract a highly valuable commodity in a residential setting, with attendant risks to property and neighbouring residents. General deterrence and retribution were identified as significant sentencing considerations for drug-related offending of this kind.
The court reduced each sentence by 25% to reflect the early guilty pleas entered in the Local Court. While the court accepted the offender's immediate admission of involvement upon being caught, it declined to treat this as assistance to authorities warranting a further specific discount, finding the conduct had already been taken into account favourably in assessing remorse and insight.
The offender's background of childhood trauma, including exposure to physical and sexual violence, informed a diagnosis of mental health issues and was accepted as part of his personal circumstances. The court found no factors that reduced his moral culpability, however, and determined that although he acted out of financial need and in a lapse of judgement, personal deterrence remained a relevant consideration given the ease with which the offence was committed.
On the principal offence, the court was satisfied that no penalty other than imprisonment was appropriate, but concluded that an ICO would better reduce the risk of reoffending in a manner affecting community safety than full-time imprisonment. The court also found the s.5 threshold for imprisonment was not met for the summary offence of possessing manufacturing instructions, imposing a fine instead.
Orders Made
- Sequence 1 (principal offence, s.24(2)): Sentenced to 1 year and 10 months imprisonment, to be served by way of an Intensive Correction Order, with the following conditions:
- No commission of any offence
- Submission to supervision by a Community Corrections officer
- Completion of 400 hours of community service work
- Attendance with a psychiatrist for prescription of medication if considered necessary by the treating psychologist
- Engagement with a psychologist at least monthly for the first 9 months
- Reporting to the Community Corrections office at Leichhardt within 7 days
- Sequence 2 (summary offence, s.11C): Fine of $1,000
Key Takeaways
- The District Court confirmed that knowingly participating in the extraction of cocaine from a substance, even where the drug is already present in another medium, can constitute taking part in the manufacture of a commercial quantity of a prohibited drug under s.24(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW).
- A 25% sentence reduction was applied to reflect early guilty pleas entered in the Local Court, consistent with the principle that such pleas facilitate the course of justice.
- Admitting involvement when apprehended in the act of committing an offence does not automatically attract a separate sentencing discount for assistance to authorities; the court treated the conduct as relevant to remorse rather than as a distinct mitigating factor.
- Where an offender's risk of reoffending in a manner affecting community safety is assessed as low, and appropriate conditions can be enforced, an ICO may be preferred over full-time imprisonment even for inherently serious drug manufacturing offences.
- Financial need and personal hardship, including a history of trauma, may inform the court's understanding of an offender's circumstances without necessarily reducing moral culpability for serious drug offences.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation:
- Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), s.24(2) (knowingly taking part in the manufacture of a commercial quantity of a prohibited drug)
- Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), s.11C (possessing instructions to manufacture a prohibited drug)
Cases cited: None stated in the judgment.