Dayment v R [2018] NSWCCA 132

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Dayment v R [2018] NSWCCA 132 Hearing dates: 22 June 2018 Decision date: 29 June 2018 Before: Payne JA at [1]; R A Hulme J at [2]; Fagan J at [78] Decision: 1. Leave to appeal against sentence granted. 2. Appeal against sentence dismissed. Catchwords: CRIME – appeal against sentence – objective seriousness – knowingly take part in supply of large commercial quantity of MDMA – where sentencing judge held that offence fell below midrange but not at lower end of scale – whether judge erred in consideration of lack of financial gain and premeditation and planning – ground rejected.

CRIME – appeal against sentence – co-offenders – disparity between sentences – whether insufficient disparity – whether such disparity as to evoke justifiable sense of grievance – supply and knowingly take part in supply of prohibited drugs – co-offender charged with more serious offences and given lengthier sentence – where relevant differences in culpability and subjective circumstances – subjective circumstances favoured co-offender but objective circumstances favoured applicant – sentence disparity fair reasonable and sensible – ground rejected. Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) s 44(2B) Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) ss 25(1), 25(2) Cases Cited: Dunn v R [2018] NSWCCA 108 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462; [2011] HCA 49 Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606; [1984] HCA 46 Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295 at 301; [1997] HCA 26 R v Deng (1996) 91 A Crim R 80 Stocco, Gino v R; Stocco, Mark v R [2018] NSWCCA 77 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Kirsty Dayment (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Ms C Wasley (Applicant) Mr B Hatfield (Crown)