Drug Offences

A high rate of success with Drug Related Criminal Offences. Call Now 1300 595 299 free consultation with specialist lawyer.

Drug offences are our specialty!

We have travelled all over Australia defending our clients in some of the most serious drug offence cases in Australia’s history.

LY Lawyers has acheived amazing results for our clients charged with minor and serious drug offences. Our criminal lawyers are amongst the top drugs lawyers Sydney has to offer. Whether you are fighting a criminal conviction for a minor possess prohibited drug offence, supply prohibited drug offence, or fighting against the Australian Federal Police for serious importation of drugs offences, we’ve likely successfully defended others in your situation.

Here are some of our results in drug offence matters:

4 years jail for involvement in importation of 585kg of Methamphetamine- Sydney District Court
Our client was charged for his role in importing a commercial quantity of a prohibited drug, being 585kg of Methamphetamine. He was also charged with the supply of 47g of methamphetamine, as a separate charge.

This was the largest ever recorded importation of methamphetamine in Australia’s history.

The offence carries a maximum term of imprisonment of life.

Our client was 21 years old at the time of the offence, and was recruited by others to participate in the movement of the drugs from the warehouse, upon them arriving in Australia. He was clearly a person who had a minor role in the offence and had little control over the enterprise and its operations.

He was recruited to undertake certain tasks, to enable those above him to keep a distance from detection.

Adam from our office fought hard to establish a strong case for leniency for our client, and was successful in establishing many mitigating circumstances that would lessen the overall jail term.

The case appeared before Sweeney J, in Sydney District Court in June 2014.

Our client was sentenced to a non-parole period of 4 years imprisonment.

An extraordinary result for an extremely serious charge.

Attempt Possess Prohibited Import - 300 kg of Cocaine- Supreme Court of Victoria
Our client, a 19 year old student, was charged for his part in the importation of 300kg of cocaine. This was the largest ever importation of any drug in Victoria’s history. The matter appeared before Justice Lasry at the Supreme Court of Victoria for sentence, upon application from the Victorian DPP that it be dealt with by the Supreme Court of Victoria, rather than the lower County Court of Victoria.
Our client’s role was very minor, clearly being recruited by more influential ‘big’ players, for his role in the transportation of the cocaine.

Our client was ultimately sentenced to a term of full time imprisonment with a non-parole period of 6.5 years. An excellent result, considering our client’s two co-accused were sentenced to 12 and 13 years imprisonment (non parole).

Supply Commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug - 7kg of Heroin- County Court of Victoria
Our client was found ‘not guilty’ after a 3 week trial at Melbourne County Court before Morrish, J. It was an extremely difficult trial where our client was charged with trafficking 7kg of prohibited drug.
Our client was adamant that he did not commit the offence, and fought the Victorian Police for 4 years defending himself.
Client Release from Gaol Time Served After 22 Months Gaol for Large Commercial Supply of Methamphetamine (2kg)
Our client was a 31 year old Taiwanese national on a working holiday visa, charged with supplying a large commercial quantity of methamphetamine (2kg). Following an undercover operation, money was brought by an undercover police officer for the purchase of the drugs. He was ultimately arrested and charged with 5 others for his part of the supply.

He was sentenced by Judge Delaney at Sydney District Court in November 2016 to non-parole period of 21 months and 22 days with a head sentence of 32 months. He had already served his time and was released immediately.

An exceptionally good result.

Our client was deported back to Taiwan to be home with his family.

Import Marketable Quantity of Prohibited Drug - 300 grams of heroin- Northern Territory Supreme Court
Our client pleaded guilty importing a marketable quantity (300grams) of border controlled drug. The matter appeared before the Northern Territory Supreme Court, where our client pleaded ‘guilty’.
She received a total sentence of 4.5 years, with a non-parole period of 2.5 years. This sentence was considered one of the lightest sentences for this type of offence.
Deemed Supply of Ecstacy - 55 pills (indictable quantity) , deemed supply of LSD (commercial quantity), deemed supply of Cocaine (trafickable quantity)
Our client was charged with the possession and deemed supply of ecstacy and LSD. Police caught him in suspicious circumstances along Oxford Street on a night out. Upon searching his car, Police found the Ecstacy, LSD and cocaine in his car. He was charged with 3 counts of supply prohibited drug. Our client’s prospects of not going to jail were not good.
As our solicitor got more involved in the case, and got to know our client, we were able to mount a strong case that a sentence other than full-time imprisonment would be appropriate.

We appeared before Blanch, CJ in May 2013, and successfully argued for a s.12 suspended jail sentence.

Possess Prohibited Drug Cases at Music Festivals
With the number of people being caught by sniffer dogs/police at music festivals and raves always increasing, we have represented countless young individuals charged with possessing small amount of ecstacy.
Generally our client would not have a criminal record, be people of good character, have good jobs and careers and have a lot to lose if convicted of the offence. Click here for plenty of case studies and useful information on Possession of drugs at music festivals and to see our track record in getting our clients “Section 10″ no convictions.
Section 10 No conviction for Supplying Ecstacy
Our client was charged with one drug offence:

1) Supply of ecstasy which contrary to s25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Traffic Act 1985. Because of the amount of Drug said to have been supplied the offence was charged as a ‘Strictly Indictable’ matter – this meaning it would be heard in a District Court. The maximum penalty for this offence in a District Court is $220,000 fine and/or fifteen years Gaol.

Our experienced lawyers negotiated with the prosecution and split the charge into one possess charge and one supply charge this enabling the matters to be kept the in the Local Court jurisdiction. The Local Court jurisdiction has limited sentencing powers with the maximum penalties of a $2200 fine and/or two years in Gaol.

The supply charge was supported by clear evidence including admissions by our client to officers at the scene.

After comprehensive negotiations between our lawyers and Police prosecutors a Plea of Guilty was entered to a drastically altered charge sheet.

We advised our client of how best to prepare for sentence assisting in obtaining psychiatric reports, counseling and other material for the sentencing process. A large number of documents and reports were submitted to the Court by our lawyer who spoke at length on our client’s behalf about the impact the incident had on him and j\his family members and the effect that his involvement with the Courts had altered his understanding of drugs.

The Magistrate made findings of guilt in relation to two charges with no criminal conviction recorded against him. He was ordered to enter into a Bond of Good Behavior for a period of two years with no other penalty.

An incredible result!

Case Study - Section 9 Bond for supplying 70 pills at Music Festival
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1999 s25(1)
Maximum Penalty in the District Court 15 year’s imprisonment or $220,000 fine or both.
There is No Standard Non Parole Period.

During a three day Music festival in Sydney our client was involved in the supply of the prohibited drug MDMA, the drug is also known as ecstasy. Messages were sent and received from our clients mobile phone in relation to drug sales. Notes of amounts of cash, sales and names were also recorded on the phone.

On the last day of the event our client was approached by Police outside the venue. He was spoken to and searched by Police. In his possession he had 70 tablets of MDMA weighing a total of 13 grams. The tablets comprised of three separate parcels of each containing 20 tablets and a further parcel of 10. Our client was arrested and taken into Police custody where he made admissions to possessing the drug and supplying others.

The law in NSW states that ‘a full time custodial sentence ought to be imposed wherever the offender has been substantially involved in the supply of prohibited drugs’. The law goes on to say ‘a full time custodial sentence must be applied in the absence of exceptional circumstances’.
Our lawyers successfully persuaded the Judge Haesler in the Sydney District Court to find ‘exceptional circumstances’.

Our client was sentenced to a Bond of Good Behaviour for a period of two years pursuant to s9 of the Crimes Sentence Act 1999.

In other cases a where people were not represented by LY Lawyers a person with 9.7 grams was sentenced to Gaol for 9 months , a person with 12.8 grams 12 months in gaol, and a person with 12.2 grams was sentenced to 2 years gaol.

Case Study - Intensive corrections order for supplying 56g of 78% pure Methamphetamine
Our client was a 30 year old man who was caught with 2 ounces of high grade methamphetamine in his car.

Adam of LY Lawyers applied for and was granted bail for our client at Liverpool Local court, when the matter first came to court.

He had a minor criminal record. He was drug dependant at the time of the offence, however had successfully completed various rehabilitation programs whilst on bail. He had also provided evidence was rehabilitation of his gambling addiction.

His wife had just given birth to his first child, and had a strong subjective case in arguing for a sentence other than full time imprisonment.

The case appeared before Judge Baly at Parramatta District Court in early November 2014, where, represented by LY Lawyers and our Barrister, Judge Baly accepted our submission that our client had excellent prospects of rehabilitation and could be made to serve his sentence of imprisonment in the community.

The judge ordered an assessment for an Intensive Corrections order, which on the next occasion at court in early December 2014, was ordered.

An exceptional result for our client.

Case Study -Section 10 when charged with supply of indictable quantity (Maximum 15 years imprisonment) of MDMA at Stereosonic 2014.
Our client was caught with 16 caps of MDMA at Stereosonic 2014. He was charged with Supply of an Indictable Quantity of a Prohibited Drug. This charge carries a maximum term of imprisonment of 15 years.

For 5 months, we negotiated the charges with the DPP and the Police Prosecution. They eventually agreed to reduce the quantity of Supply and have the case stay in the Local Court for prosecution. He pleaded guilty.

Our client was a fine example of a good person, who made a terrible decision. He had a bright future ahead of him, which was potentially destroyed by this one decision.

We compiled all of the necessary evidence for his sentencing hearing at Burwood Local Court in May 2015, before Magistrate Still.

Mr. Still found our evidence compelling, and clear evidence that our client had fully rehabilitated. He was impressed with our client’s case for a Section 10, and after strong submissions by our Lawyer, agreed to place our client on a Section 10 Bond for 2 years.

It is very rare to achieve a Section 10 for Supply of an indictable quantity of prohibited Drug.

Case Study -Repeat offender caught in possession of cocaine/section 10 no conviction.
At the Local Court our client was convicted of possession of a gram of cocaine. He appealed to the district court. Our client did not have a clear record, having smaller matters on his record.

Our client worked in a field that required him to travel around the world but particularly to America.  A drug conviction would impact his ability to travel to America to learn about new techniques that helped him in his work.

Judge Armitage at the District Court in Parramatta agreed that it would be a further harm to the community if our client, who was very talented, was unable to further his skills and bring them back to Australia if he had a drug conviction.

The appeal was upheld and he was given a section 10, non conviction bond for a period of two years.
Case Study - Cultivation of cannabis plant- section 10 bond.
Our client was charged with the cultivation of a cannabis plant, a serious charge.

Police attended our client’s home for reasons other than the cannabis plant. When they arrived they asked to search the house and found a make-shift green house with a cannabis plant inside.

Our client’s instructions were that due to personal issues he had used the cannabis for stress release and to help him sleep. Our solicitor organized affidavits and character references for our client showing that our client was extremely remorseful for his actions and was no longer using cannabis.

Our solicitor supplied the court with results of drug tests that our client had undertaken showing that he had not used drugs since the charge.

The matter was heard at Kogarah Local Court, before magistrate Haskett. The judge was satisfied that our client was no longer using drugs and that this was an isolated incident. Magistrate Haskett handed our client a non-conviction section 10 bond for two years.

Case Study - Charge of Supply Withdrawn.
Our client was charged with the supply of 63 ecstasy pills, 27 grams of cocaine and dealing with proceeds of crime in the amount of $1200.

Our solicitor successfully had the charge of supply of 27 grams cocaine withdrawn during the committal stage of the proceedings.  

The matter proceeded to sentence before Judge Delaney on the charge of proceeds of crime and supply of the ecstasy tablets.

Our solicitor successfully argued our client was not trafficking to a substantial degree and that our client was unlikely to reoffend.  Further our solicitor argued that our client should receive a future discount for his assistance to the police.  

The court imposed a 20 months term of imprisonment but suspended that sentence on the condition our client is to be of good behaviour.

Case Study - Drug Offence gets ICO.
Our client was charged with supply of prohibited drug namely 9 grams cocaine and dealing with proceeds of crime in the amount of $9000.  These are both serious offences and a rule in sentencing in drug offences is that a full time custodial sentence is appropriate if a court finds someone has been trafficking to any substantial degree. 

 The matter proceeded to sentence at the Sydney District Court before Judge Bennett.  The prosecution argued that our client engaged in trafficking to a substantial degree and that full time custody was the only appropriate sentence.  

We successfully argued that our client was not trafficking to a substantial degree and that our client demonstrated significant remorse and rehabilitation. The court agreed with our position that our client could serve his sentence by way of intensive corrections order (ICO)

 Our client is currently serving his two year term of imprisonment within the community by way of ICO.

Case Study - 2 Counts of Supply and 3 Counts of Possession, 2 Section 10's
Our client was charged with 2 counts of supplying a prohibited drug (deemed supply – indictable quantity and 3 counts of possessing a prohibited drug.

He was caught with drugs in his possession of the drugs outside Subsonic Music Festival at Barrington Tops, NSW. He was found with:

1. 7 grams of crystal MDMA (deemed supply)

2. 49 LSD tablets (deemed supply)

3. 1g of cocaine

4. 1g of cannabis

Following successful negotiations with the DPP, Adam of LY Lawyers was able to reduce the charge of Commercial Supply of Prohibited Drug (LSD) to an Indictable Supply of Prohibited Drug. The case was committed for sentence from Raymond Terrace Local Court to Newcastle District Court

Our client’s case of successful and ongoing rehabilitation was faultless. He provided the court with numerous reports and evidence of his constant drug rehabilitation over the course of 9 months since his arrest. Evidence was also adduced pointing to the non-commercial nature of the supply offences, thus departing from any suggestion of ‘drug trafficking’ on the part of our client

Judge Ellis of Newcastle District Court heard the case on 21 October 2016. Ellis J was extremely impressed with our client’s progress and accepted our argument that the offence “fell right at the bottom end” of objective seriousness in cases such as these

His Honour excercised his discretion to not impose a criminal conviction, placing our client on 2 Section 10 Bonds for a period of 2 years.

Case Study - Commercial Supply Of Prohibited Drugs, Suspended Sentence Of 21 Months.
In 2014 our client was charged with supply of a commercial quantity of prohibited drug namely 130 grams of ecstasy. This charge carries a maximum penalty of 20 years imprisonment.

We were instructed to appear at the bail application and our principal successfully applied for bail. Our client was released pending his trial.

Our client instructed us that some of the drugs were for his own personal use and instructed us to take the matter to trial. Successful negotiations on the first day of the trial resulted in the charge being downgraded to a supply amount above the indictable quantity, an amount of 119 grams. The maximum penalty is 15 years imprisonment for this charge.

The matter proceeded to sentence and the court was impressed by our clients rehabilitation over a 20 month period since his release bail.

Our client was sentenced to a 21 months term of imprisonment which was suspended pursuant to section 12. Our client remained a free person. An exceptional result for our client.

Case Study - Supply of 13 Caps MDMA to S10; no bond
Our client was charged with supply of 13 MDMA caps. Out client instructed us that the MDMA caps were for his personal use. We made successful representations to the prosecutors and they agreed to withdraw the supply offence on the basis our client pleads guilty to a possession charge.
The matter proceeded to sentence on the possession charge. We submitted a strong subjective case and were able to convince the court that out client had excellent prospects of rehabilitation and was unlikely to reoffend. The court with our submission, that a section 10 appropriate. The matter was dealt with without a bond.