WA v Stocker

(2022) 305 A Crim R 335; [2022] WASCA 178

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Drug offences
4. › Possession of methylamphetamine with intent to sell or supply
5. › Trafficable quantity
6. › Whether partly suspended sentence manifestly inadequate as to type
7. › Whether immediate imprisonment the only appropriate disposition
8. › Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), ss 6(1)(a), 34(1)(a), 34(1)(aa)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Totality principle
4. › First limb
5. › Whether total effective sentence bore proper relationship to overall criminality
6. › Offending on bail
7. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 88
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Suspended imprisonment
4. › Statutory construction
5. › Whether s 88 of Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) applies to suspended imprisonment under pt 11
6. › Relationship between pt 11 and pt 13
7. › Whether court may order partial concurrency and partial suspension
8. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), ss 76, 85(2), 88
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Partly concurrent sentences
4. › Requirements of s 88(4)
5. › Whether period specified extends beyond earliest release date
6. › Sentencing Act 1995 (WA), s 88(4)

Quick Take

For serious methylamphetamine dealing offences, partly suspended imprisonment will rarely if ever be appropriate; the only appropriate disposition is immediate imprisonment. The interaction between pt 11 (suspended imprisonment) and pt 13 (immediate imprisonment) of the Sentencing Act 1995 (WA) remains unresolved and awaits determination by a five-judge bench, but Mazza JA's analysis supports the view that s 88 applies when imposing suspended imprisonment. Sentencing courts should apply the totality principle and make concurrency/cumulacy orders before deciding whether to suspend.