Enr v WA

[2018] WASCA 9

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. › Manifest excess
5. › Drug offences
6. › Possession with intent to sell or supply
7. › Offering to supply prohibited drug
8. › Dexamphetamine
9. › Whether individual sentences manifestly excessive
10. › Whether immediate imprisonment only appropriate sentencing option
11. › Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), s 6(1)(a), s 6(1)(c)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Totality principle
4. › First limb
5. › Whether total effective sentence bore proper relationship to overall criminality
6. › Multiple drug offences
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Drug offences
4. › Relevance of relative harm of particular drug
5. › Dexamphetamine compared with methylamphetamine and heroin
6. › General deterrence as primary sentencing consideration
7. › Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), s 34(1)(a)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Suspended imprisonment
4. › Drug offences
5. › Whether suspension appropriate for serious drug offences
6. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 39(2), s 39(3)

Quick Take

Dexamphetamine dealing offences attract the same maximum penalty as methylamphetamine and heroin offences under the Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), and while a sentencing judge may treat dexamphetamine as less harmful than those drugs, the seriousness of dealing offences involving dexamphetamine must not be underestimated. Immediate imprisonment remains the generally appropriate sentencing option for such offences, and general deterrence remains the primary sentencing consideration. A sentence of 2 years' imprisonment for possession of dexamphetamine with intent to sell or supply, in the context of multiple related offences, is within the sound exercise of the sentencing discretion.