REGINA v. SAMA [2005] NSWCCA 191

REGINA v. SAMA [2005] NSWCCA 191

Although the sentencing judge erred by appearing to treat the strength of the Crown case as relevant to the utilitarian value of the guilty plea, the error did not warrant appellate intervention. The evidence established planned ongoing supply rather than opportunistic conduct, there was no reasonable possibility...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal granted but appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['ongoing Supply of Prohibited Drugs' 'discount for Plea of Guilty' 'utilitarian Value of Guilty Plea' 'strength of Crown Case' 'undercover Police Trap' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'quantity of Drugs Supplied']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['ongoing Supply of Prohibited Drugs' 'discount for Plea of Guilty' 'utilitarian Value of Guilty Plea' 'strength of Crown Case' 'undercover Police Trap' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'quantity of Drugs Supplied']

Source-derived case record

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 Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by giving only a limited discount for the guilty plea because of the strength of the Crown case.' 'Whether it was a mitigating factor that there was a reasonable possibility the offence might not have been committed had police not approached the applicant.' 'Whether the sentence of 30 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 15 months was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sentencing judge erred by appearing to treat the strength of the Crown case as relevant to the utilitarian value of the guilty plea, the error did not warrant appellate intervention. The evidence established planned ongoing supply rather than opportunistic conduct, there was no reasonable possibility that the applicant would not have offended but for police encouragement, and the sentence imposed was not manifestly excessive having regard to the seriousness of the offence, the ongoing supply, the small but relevant drug quantities, and the applicant's subjective circumstances.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal granted but appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal be granted.' 'Appeal be dismissed.']