[2017] VCC 698
General information, not legal advice.
County Court of Victoria
2017-06-01
Original judgment source is linked above.
Subject: Trafficking not less than commercial quantity
Sentence: 4 years' imprisonment / non-parole 2 years 8 months
a commercial quantity. This offence occurred over a period of a month, between 1 July 2016 and 2 August 2016. The maximum sentence for this offence is 25 years' imprisonment.
a charge of possession of a drug of dependence. The prosecution did not allege that you possessed the cannabis for trafficking purposes. In those circumstances, the maximum penalty in respect of Charge 3 is five penalty units.
a summary charge that was transferred to this court from the Magistrates' Court and your counsel, Mr Norton, told me that you consented to that summary charge being dealt with by me.
Ms Simonoski's phone identified you as the person that was her supplier of the drug 1,4-Butanediol. That is how the police identified you as a suspect and interception of your telephone conversations in turn revealed that you trafficked 14.16 litres of 1,4-Butanediol during the period of one month covered by
Charge 1. The threshold for a commercial quantity of 1,4-Butanediol is
two kilograms or two litres. You have thus trafficked well over the commercial quantity threshold over a period of one month.
1,4-Butanediol is a relatively cheap drug which is readily available in the drug market for users and the prospects of large financial reward from trafficking this drug are low. Nevertheless, drug trafficking is a prevalent offence that has
a number of unacceptable consequences for the community. Any sentence
I pass must properly reflect application of the sentencing principle of general deterrence.
a successful career in the construction industry. At age 26, you commenced using methamphetamine and developed a daily habit by the time of this offending. Your daily methamphetamine use was managed by also taking
I was told and accept that after your release on bail, you worked to rebuild your relationship with your wife. You went to live with your parents and you were eventually joined there by your wife. Your parents and your wife were in court to support you and I am satisfied that you have their on-going support.
a month and a half and visited you when you were transferred to Marngoneet prison. She told me and I accept that she told you she would not live with you until your attitude towards ridding yourself from drugs improved. After this, you both attended counselling. You were at first reluctant. Your wife gave evidence that the counselling seemed to open your eyes to the improvements you could make to your life by ridding yourself of drugs.
a knee reconstruction and then subsequently injured your foot in a separate incident. It was not suggested that this would affect the sentence I should impose. It did however, disrupt the counselling you were having from
"Mr Sepe explained that since his recent incarceration and upcoming court hearing, his focus has been primarily on his family and in particular, his wife and two young daughters. Mr Sepe expressed deep regret regarding his past substance use and illegal activities, as a result of which he will likely be separated from his family. Mr Sepe showed good insight around the impacts that his substance use and related activities have had on himself and the people around him. Mr Sepe explained that while he has no desire to return to illicit drug use, he nevertheless wishes to continue with AOD counselling upon the completion of his sentence. He explained that this is because he wants to take all possible measures to ensure that he does not stray from his values in the future."
Ms Simonoski, in that you are each drug users who trafficked the drugs that you did to support your respective drug habits and the quantities of drugs trafficked are similar, in your case, you have a prior conviction for drug trafficking and you have other prior convictions and you have previously received a community corrections order not long before this offending. Because this is the second occasion you have faced a court on drug trafficking charges in your case, the sentence imposed must properly address both general and specific deterrence. The sentence must properly deter others from offending as you have and it must deter you from again offending in this way. The sentence must also properly serve to denounce your offending.
a non-parole period. He submitted that an appropriate head sentence with
a lengthy period on parole would serve to address all of the purposes of sentencing here. In my opinion, this is not a case for fixing a short non-parole period. In my view, to do so would not properly address both general and specific deterrence, given the fact you committed these offences seven months after you had completed a community corrections order for similar offending.
DPP
Sepe [2017] VCC 698