The Court of Criminal Appeal held that tendency evidence of facilitating small-scale recreational cocaine supplies had significant probative value for a charge of knowingly taking part in a large commercial supply, because the asserted tendency — facilitating supply of cocaine between Person A and the applicant's associates — went to the critical fact in issue of whether the applicant's introduction of the co-offender to Person A was for the purpose of drug supply, notwithstanding the vast difference in scale. The Court confirmed that s 25(1) supply simpliciter is a statutory alternative to s 25(2) charges by operation of s 25(3) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act, that the s 29 deeming provision had no application, and that no separate particularisation or election was required. On sentence, the Court held that the sentencing judge's finding that the applicant knew the supply was of a non-specific but considerable amount under 250g warranting $330,000 was reasonably open on the evidence and consistent with the jury's verdict of acquittal on the quantity-based charges.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 1 later case that cites this judgment.