R v Greenwood [2018] NSWDC 499

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Greenwood [2018] NSWDC 499 Hearing dates: 11 May 2018 Date of orders: 11 May 2018 Decision date: 11 May 2018 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Buscombe DCJ Decision: Sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 18 months a non-parole period of 11 months. Sentenced to an aggregate sentence of five years imprisonment with an aggregate non-parole period of three years. Catchwords: SENTENCING — Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act — suspended sentence — sentence of imprisonment SENTENCING — firearms offences — aggregate sentence of imprisonment Legislation Cited: Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) Weapons Prohibition Act 1998 (NSW) Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) Cases Cited: Muldrock and The Queen (2011) 249 CLR 120 Category: Sentence Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown) Matthew David Greenwood (Offender) Representation: Counsel: M Coroneos (Offender)

Solicitors: G Ellis (Crown) File Number(s): 2014/00055676; 2016/00207581

SENTENCE 1. The offender pleaded guilty in the Local Court and adhered to those pleas to the following offences. 2. The first offence is that on 8 July 2016 at Hobartville, he manufactured a prohibited drug, being methylamphetamine. That is an offence under s 24(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), and has a maximum penalty of 15 years' imprisonment and/or a fine of $220,000. There is no applicable standard non‑parole period. 3. The second offence is that between 13 June 2016 and 8 July 2016 at Richmond, the offender on three or more separate occasions during a period of 30 consecutive days, supplied a prohibited drug other than cannabis, for financial or material reward. That is an offence under s 25A(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act, and has a maximum penalty of 20 years' imprisonment and/or a fine of $385,000 and again there is no applicable standard non‑parole period. 4. There is a third offence, that on 8 July 2016 at Hobartville, the offender possessed a prohibited weapon, being a butterfly knife without being authorised to do so by a permit. That is an offence under s 7(1) of the Weapons Prohibition Act 1998 (NSW). It has a maximum penalty of 14 years' imprisonment and there is a standard non‑parole period of five years. 5. There is a further offence, that on 9 July 2016 at Hobartville, the offender possessed a pistol, being a Walther PPK self‑loading pistol, not being authorised to do so by a licence or a permit. That is an offence under s 7(1) of the Firearms Act 1996 (NSW). It has a maximum penalty of 14 years' imprisonment and there is an applicable standard non‑parole period of four years' imprisonment 6. There are three offences, that on 8 July 2016 at Hobartville, the offender possessed a prohibited firearm, not being authorised to do so by a permit or licence. The firearms concerned are, a shortened .22 calibre Squires Bingham rifle, a shortened 12 gauge Bellamber Ibigen double‑barrel shotgun, and a .68 calibre Spyder paintball gun. Each of those offences is an offence under s 7(1) of the Firearms Act, and there is an applicable standard non‑parole period of four years. 7. There are two offences, that between 8 and 9 July 2016 at Hobartville, the offender possessed a firearm not being authorised to do so by a permit or licence. The firearms concerned are a .222 Remington calibre Winchester repeat bolt action rifle, and an imitation revolver. They are both offences under s 7A(1) of the Firearms Act. They each have a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment and there is no applicable standard non‑parole period. 8. There are three offences to be taken into account when sentencing the offender on the ongoing supply offence. Those offences are on a Form 1. They are: possession of equipment to administer a prohibited drug, being a pipe, an offence of supply of prohibited drug being 453 grams of cannabis, and an offence of possess ammunition being 202 shotgun cartridges and cartridges of various calibres. 9. In taking those offences into account, I have had regard to the guideline judgment concerning Form 1 matters. I consider that they should have a limited impact on the sentence that I am to impose on the ongoing supply count.