The risk of deportation is at least potentially relevant to the exercise of the sentencing discretion in South Australia, following Guden v The Queen. However, the sentencing court cannot speculate: absent evidence or a concession, the mere risk of deportation cannot be taken into account because the manifestation of that risk depends on the future exercise of ministerial discretion under s 501CA of the Migration Act. Possession of 'tools of the trade' such as multiple mobile phones, cash, and packaging equipment does not necessarily constitute discreditable conduct within s 34P of the Evidence Act 1929 (SA); such evidence may instead be admissible as circumstantial evidence of capacity and intention to engage in the charged offence without engaging the discreditable conduct provisions.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.
1 of the 1 citing case carries a classified treatment. How each court treated it is available to signed-in members.