R v Samantha Jane LENDILL [2008] NSWDC 394

R v Samantha Jane LENDILL [2008] NSWDC 394

Although imprisonment was required for the drug supply offences, the quantities were in the low range of objective seriousness, there was no evidence of sophisticated planning or organisation, the offender was a drug-dependent user who supplied drugs to support her own habit, she had reasonable prospects of rehabilitation with strong family support, and she had already spent just over two months in custody; those exceptional circumstances justified suspending the custodial sentences under s 12.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Supply of Prohibited Drugs and Related Offences / Sentence After Jury Conviction at Trial
Outcome
The offender was sentenced to imprisonment for both drug supply offences, with both sentences suspended under s 12 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999; related offences were dealt with by fines, and destruction and forfeiture orders were made.
Legal Topics
['supplying Prohibited Drugs' 'deemed Supply' 'suspended Sentence' 'rehabilitation' 'good Behaviour Bond' 'goods in Custody' 'custody of Knife in a Public Place' 'forfeiture and Destruction Orders']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['supplying Prohibited Drugs' 'deemed Supply' 'suspended Sentence' 'rehabilitation' 'good Behaviour Bond' 'goods in Custody' 'custody of Knife in a Public Place' 'forfeiture and Destruction Orders']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentencing for Supply of Prohibited Drugs and Related Offences / Sentence After Jury Conviction at Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What amount of methylamphetamine should be treated as possessed for the purpose of supply for sentencing.' 'Whether there was any alternative to a sentence of imprisonment for the drug supply offences.' 'Whether the custodial sentences should be served by full-time custody or suspended under s 12 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although imprisonment was required for the drug supply offences, the quantities were in the low range of objective seriousness, there was no evidence of sophisticated planning or organisation, the offender was a drug-dependent user who supplied drugs to support her own habit, she had reasonable prospects of rehabilitation with strong family support, and she had already spent just over two months in custody; those exceptional circumstances justified suspending the custodial sentences under s 12.

Court Disposition

The offender was sentenced to imprisonment for both drug supply offences, with both sentences suspended under s 12 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999; related offences were dealt with by fines, and destruction and forfeiture orders were made.

Orders

  • ['For supplying methylamphetamine, sentenced to 2 years imprisonment, wholly suspended for 2 years under s 12 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 on condition of entry into a good behaviour bond.' 'For supplying cocaine, sentenced to 1 year imprisonment concurrent with the methylamphetamine sentence,...