Bonham-Smith v WA

[2023] WASCA 146

Western Australia Court of Appeal

Built by Barristers,
For Australian Law.

See how it works

Interrogate

Catchwords

1. Criminal Law
2. › Appeal against sentence
3. › Drug offences
4. › Commercial drug dealing
5. › Multiple drug types
6. › Whether total effective sentence infringed first limb of totality principle
7. › Misuse of Drugs Act 1981 (WA), s 6(1)(a), s 6(1)(b)
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Drug offences
4. › Sentencing considerations
5. › General and personal deterrence
6. › Weight and purity of drugs
7. › Commercial gain
8. › Nature and level of participation in drug dealing
1. Criminal Law
2. › Sentencing
3. › Totality principle
4. › First limb
5. › Whether total effective sentence disproportionate to overall criminality
6. › Accumulation of sentences
7. › Failure to comply with data access order justifying cumulative sentence
8. › Criminal Investigation Act 2006 (WA), s 61(2)

Quick Take

A total effective sentence of 6 years' imprisonment for commercial drug dealing involving 81.49 g of methylamphetamine, 16.62 g of cocaine, 2.996 kg of cannabis, $40,135 in cash proceeds, manufacture of cannabis oil, and failure to comply with a data access order does not infringe the first limb of the totality principle. Offences of failing to comply with a data access order justify cumulative sentences to ensure appropriate deterrence.