Case facts

Our client was charged with supplying a prohibited drug. The amount of the drug involved was less than the traffickible quantity as set out in the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act.

In circumstances where police detect a person in possession of a quantity of drug exceeding the traffickible quantity, they can invoke the provisions of section 29 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act which are known as the deeming provisions – you are deemed to have the prohibited drug for the purpose of supply unless you prove to the contrary. The police indicated that he had made complete admissions to both offences. He had not. There was no other indicia of drug supply – such as written ledgers, drug tabs, resealable plastic bags, scales, drug paraphernalia, cash or the like. Our client’s instructions were that he had the drug in his possession and it was for personal use. He should have been charged with Possess Prohibited Drug.


Case result

We made representations to the police to drop the Drug Supply charge and replace the charge with a possess prohibited drug charge. The police did not realize their mistake and refused to do so. We proceeded to defend the matter.

Several months later the police realized that they had charged him with the wrong offence. However, by this time the police were out of time to file a Possess Prohibited Drug charge as it had become statute barred. The charge was subsequently withdrawn and dismissed, A costs application was made pursuant to section 213 and 214 Criminal Procedure Act and the police were ordered to pay our client’s legal costs.

If you are facing police charges in the Local court, district Court or even the Supreme court, make certain that you obtain professional and appropriate legal advice from one of accredited criminal law specialists.


Our Sydney Drug Lawyers are committed to excellence in defending criminal charges. Contact us if you require assistance.