Citation: [2026] NSWDC 113
Court: District Court of New South Wales
Date: 20 March 2026
Judge(s): Colefax SC DCJ
Background
The offender, a 30-year-old man, was sentenced on two principal drug supply offences. The first (sequence 8) was deemed supply of methylamphetamine in an amount exceeding the large commercial quantity, carrying a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and a standard non-parole period of 15 years. The second (sequence 10) was deemed supply of cocaine in an amount exceeding the indictable but below the commercial quantity, carrying a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment.
The offending was uncovered when police executed a search warrant at residential premises in Plumpton on 19 October 2023. Officers found approximately 1.15 kilograms of methylamphetamine (at 78.5% to 82% purity), 17.08 grams of cocaine, scales, disposable gloves, plastic bags, a pistol magazine containing ammunition, multiple Rolex watches, and gold and diamond jewellery. The offender also asked the Court to take into account on a Form 1 a charge of possessing ammunition without a licence.
At the time of the offending, the offender was on conditional liberty, specifically three community corrections orders and bail for an unrelated charge (of which he was later acquitted).
Legal Issues
- The objective seriousness of each supply offence, assessed by reference to drug quantity, purity, value, and the offender's role
- The offender's role in the drug supply operation, particularly given inconsistent accounts provided to report authors
- The weight to be given to subjective factors including childhood trauma (Bugmy factors), psychological conditions (De La Rosa considerations), rehabilitation efforts, and remorse
- The appropriate sentences, including the application of totality and whether the sentences should be partly concurrent or cumulative
Decision
Objective seriousness: The Court found the methylamphetamine quantity (1.15 kg) was a little over twice the large commercial quantity threshold of 0.5 kg, and the cocaine (17.08 g) was a little over three times the 5 g indictable quantity threshold. The methylamphetamine was of very high purity. While no direct evidence of value was tendered, the Court accepted the methylamphetamine would have been very valuable given its quantity and purity.
Role in offending: The Court rejected the offender's initial claim to a sentencing assessment report author that he was merely holding items for a third party for 24 hours. A later account to a psychologist (Dr Dalati) revealed the offender had accepted an opportunity to sell cocaine and methylamphetamine in the context of drug debt and financial stress. The Court was satisfied beyond reasonable doubt that the offender was holding the drugs for sale by himself, as evidenced by the paraphernalia and luxury items found alongside the drugs. Sequence 8 was assessed as slightly below mid-range for offences of its kind; sequence 10 was assessed as towards but not at the bottom of the range.
Subjective factors: The offender experienced civil war in Sudan, life in a refugee camp, childhood sexual abuse, violence from his father, and racism after arriving in Australia. These gave rise to Bugmy factors that slightly reduced moral culpability and the weight of general and specific deterrence, though both sentencing considerations remained relevant. The Court also found De La Rosa considerations were engaged, as the offender's constellation of serious psychological conditions, stemming from his traumatic background, had contributed to substance use and impaired judgment. Since his arrest, the offender had completed residential rehabilitation at Odyssey House and multiple other programs, and he had secured part-time work with Odyssey House, with the prospect of full-time employment. The Court was "just satisfied" the offender was genuinely remorseful, despite his failure to give sworn evidence and his history of dishonesty.
Conditional liberty: The three breached community corrections orders were treated as an aggravating factor. The bail condition was not treated as meaningful aggravation because the offender was ultimately acquitted of that charge.
Orders Made
- For sequence 8 (large commercial quantity methylamphetamine supply, with the Form 1 matter taken into account): the Court imposed a sentence. (The specific term is not recorded in the truncated judgment text available.)
- For sequence 10 (indictable quantity cocaine supply): the Court imposed a sentence. (The specific term is not recorded in the truncated judgment text available.)
- The Form 1 matter (unlicensed possession of ammunition, sequence 7) did not result in any increase to the sentence for the principal offence, as it does not carry a term of imprisonment.
Note: The full sentencing orders, including head sentences, non-parole periods, and commencement dates, were not available in the truncated text provided.
Key Takeaways
- Inconsistent accounts given by an offender to different report authors can be used to reject exculpatory claims about the offender's role, particularly where the offender does not give sworn evidence at the sentencing hearing.
- The District Court found that possession of drugs alongside scales, gloves, bags, and luxury items was sufficient to establish beyond reasonable doubt that the offender had been holding drugs for personal sale rather than acting merely as a custodian for others.
- In applying Bugmy v R, the Court accepted that the offender's experiences of civil war, refugee camps, childhood abuse, and racism slightly reduced moral culpability and the weight of deterrence, while confirming those sentencing considerations nonetheless remained relevant.
- De La Rosa considerations were engaged where a constellation of serious psychological conditions, caused by childhood trauma and contributing to substance misuse, reduced the offender's capacity for proper judgment in connection with the offending.
- Significant post-arrest rehabilitation (including completion of residential programs and securing employment) was acknowledged as relevant to the offender's prospects of rehabilitation, although the Court noted the tension flagged by Dr Dalati regarding the potential impact of a return to custody on those rehabilitation gains.
Legislation and Cases Referenced
Legislation:
- Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), ss 25(1), 25(2), 29
Cases:
- DPP (C'th) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1
- R v Qi [2019] NSWCCA 73
- Bugmy v R [2013] 249 CLR 571