Perry v WA

[2012] WASCA 124

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Attempting to manufacture methylamphetamine
5. › Whether sentencing judge failed to consider suspended sentence
6. › Whether sentencing remarks read in context disclosed error
7. › Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), s 6(1)(b), s 33(1)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Drug offences
4. › Manufacture of prohibited drug
5. › Methylamphetamine
6. › General deterrence as dominant sentencing consideration
7. › Immediate imprisonment ordinarily appropriate
8. › Exceptional circumstances required for suspension
9. › Drug for personal use
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Consistency of sentences
5. › Attempt and completed offence
6. › Where offender has all necessary materials
7. › Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), s 6(1)(b), s 33(1), s 34(1)(a)
1. Appeal
2. › Criminal appeal
3. › Appeal against sentence
4. › Whether different sentence should have been imposed
5. › Criminal Appeals Act 2004 (WA), ss 31(3), 31(4)

Quick Take

A sentence of immediate imprisonment will ordinarily be imposed for manufacturing or attempting to manufacture methylamphetamine, whether for personal use or otherwise, and only exceptional circumstances will warrant suspension. Sentencing remarks must be read as a whole and in context, not by isolating individual passages. Where an offender has all necessary materials, there is little difference in culpability between an attempt and a completed offence of drug manufacture.