Facts

The appellant, Mauger, pleaded guilty to the offence of supplying a prohibited drug under the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). He was provided a s 10 (Sentencing Procedure Act 1999) bond – now called a ‘conditional release order’ (CRO) – which meant no conviction would be recorded. The prosecution appealed this decision on the basis that the sentence was not adequate. Ultimately, the appeal failed and Mauger was able to retain his original CRO.

 

Relevant Legislation

S 10 of the Sentencing Procedure Act 199 (NSW) provides that a court may discharge an offender conditionally if conviction would be ‘inexpedient’. In determining whether it is reasonable to make such an order, the court will have regard to:

• the person’s character, antecedents, age, health and mental condition,
• the trivial nature of the offence,
• the extenuating circumstances in which the offence was committed,
• any other matter that the court thinks proper to consider.

 

Judicial Reasoning: Mental State

• ‘[H]is otherwise good judgment was clouded to such a degree that he allowed himself to engage in this criminal conduct’
• ‘[H]e had had a tough year at work, had recently broken up with his girlfriend and “wanted to make the last days of summer feel like freedom”.’

 

Judicial Reasoning: Legal and Social Consequences

• ‘[T]he consequences of the recording of a conviction’ included ‘the possibility that the respondent might lose his job...’
• The respondent is undeniably a person of good character with no criminal antecedents.
• the recording of a conviction for the offence in this particular case is of little or no practical or theoretical consequence to the good order of the community but is by way of contrast potentially of great importance to the respondent.
• The particular legal and social consequences for the respondent of recording a conviction against him in this case far outweigh the requirements of punishment, denunciation, or special or general deterrence.

 

Significance

• Overall, R v Mauger illustrates how the courts balance the nature of an offence with the implications of a conviction.

 

About Post Author