Bail Application – Cultivation in a Commercial Quantity of Cannabis

Cannabis PlantsThis is case study on a bail application for Cultivation in a Commercial Quantity of Cannabis.

Our client was charged with Cultivation in a Commercial Quantity of a Narcotic Plant, namely cannabis. He came before the court in his mid 50’s for the first time and the police made an application to remand him. Even without a prior criminal history, he found himself needing to show exceptional circumstances in order to be granted bail by the court. This is the highest test at law for the granting of bail.

Dee Giannopoulos represented the client at the Melbourne Magistrates’ Court.

We had conferenced with our client prior to his record of interview which was attended by appointment. During our conferences, we made a bail application plan in the event that our client would be remanded. Kristina Kothrakis attended the record of interview with him and following this, the client was remanded into custody as we had predicted.

An application for bail was made at the remand hearing and the informant was cross examined as to the strength of the prosecution case. It became evident that although the police investigation related to 6 grow houses, our client was only potentially linked to one house.

With an absence of prior convictions, a submission was made that there was potential for our client not to receive a term of imprisonment even if he pleaded guilty to the cultivation with respect to the one house. The police raised concerns of flight risk. The court was advised that our client had his passport with him and could hand it in to the police immediately.

Ultimately, the magistrate was satisfied that imposition of certain conditions, including a significant surety, could allay the courts any concern about risk. She found exceptional circumstances and granted bail. This was an exceptional outcome for a bail application for Cultivation in a Commercial Quantity of Cannabis.
 

Elements of Cultivation of Narcotic Plants – Commercial Quantity

  • The accused cultivated or attempted to cultivate a narcotic plant.
  • The quantity of narcotic plant was not less than the commercial quantity applicable to that narcotic plant.
  • The accused was not authorised by or licensed under the Act or the regulations, or the Access to Medicinal Cannabis Act 2016 or the regulations under that Act, to do so.

 
Other related case studies:

 


Dee Giannopoulosdee-giannopoulos-profile

Dee is based in our Melbourne office and appears at all Courts in Victoria. Dee’s commitment to her clients and her passion for justice drives her to achieve great results.

Visit Dee’s profile to read more about her background and experience.
 


DISCLAIMER: This is a real case study of an actual case from our files. Details pertaining to the client have been changed to protect their privacy. The sentence imposed and the charge have not been altered. These case studies are published to demonstrate real outcomes and give an indication of possible tariffs in Court. We do not guarantee a similar case on these charges will get the same result. Please note that we post results at our discretion, therefore while many case studies are average results, others are notable for their exceptional outcomes. PUBLISHED 20/08/2019