Nine months jail for cannabis cultivation

Press, 14 June 1984, Page 4

Nine months jail for cannabis cultivation

Nine months imprisonment was imposed in the District Court yesterday on an unemployed man who appeared for sentence on charges arising from his growing 82 cannabis plants on his property. The defendant, Declan Dennis Hetherington, aged 28, had been found guilty by a jury at his trial last week on a charge of possessing cannabis for sale or supply. He had earlier pleaded guilty to related charges of cultivating cannabis, and possessing a pipe for the purpose of committing an offence against provisions of the Misuse of Drugs Act.

On the latter charge he was convicted and discharged. Judge Fraser imposed concurrent terms of nine months imprisonment for each of the first two offences.

At his trial evidence had been that police found 82 plants growing in the defendant’s garden, and about 80 grams of dried cannabis in various bags in his house. The defendant had denied having the cannabis for sale or supply and said he grew the cannabis for his own use.

Counsel (Mr G. R. Lascelles) submitted yesterday, in mitigation of penalty, that there had been no evidence in the trial of the defendant’s having sold or supplied cannabis. He had been caught only by the presumption in law, that an amount of cannabis above 28 grams was deemed to be for sale or supply unless a defendant satisfactorily explained otherwise.

Mr Lascelles said there had been nothing in the

house to indicate a commercial operation. A significant part of the cannabis plants was stalks and stems, which could not be smoked. The defendant had no previous convictions, and had a stable domestic situation.

He kept very much to himself and it was not a case of a person mixing freely with people of unsavoury records.

Mr Lascelles submitted that a term of periodic detention would be an appropriate penalty. The defendant was not likely to appear in court again, he said.

The Judge said that, taking into account all the circumstances of the case, he saw no alternative to imprisonment. Periodic detention was not appropriate.