Docker v Faulkner

[2000] WASCA 282

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentence
3. › Spent convictions
4. › Discretionary power to make spent conviction order
5. › Preconditions under s 45 Sentencing Act 1995 (WA)
6. › Whether offence trivial or offender of previous good character
7. › Seriousness of offence of cultivation of 74 cannabis plants
8. › Relevance of occupation in security industry
9. › Whether Magistrate in error in declining to make orders
10. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 39(2), s 45
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentence
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Magistrate taking into account irrelevant considerations
5. › Drawing inference of commercial purpose from simple cultivation charge
6. › Whether appellate court should exercise discretion afresh
1. Criminal Law
2. › Drugs
3. › Cultivation of cannabis
4. › Simple cultivation
5. › Prosecution amending charge from cultivation with intent to sell or supply to simple cultivation
6. › Sentencing on basis of amended charge only
7. › Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), s 6(2), s 7(1)(a), s 7(2)

Quick Take

Cultivation of 74 cannabis plants, even where amateurish and for personal use, is properly described as a serious offence for the purposes of s 45 of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), and the seriousness of the offence may outweigh the offender's good character and potential loss of a security licence when considering whether to make a spent conviction order. Where the prosecution amends a charge from cultivation with intent to sell or supply to simple cultivation, the sentencing court must not draw inferences of commercial purpose.