Year in jail for having cannabis

Press, 3 September 1986, Page 4

Year in jail for having cannabis

A year’s imprisonment was imposed in the District Court yesterday on Keith Douglas Pullan, aged 28, a seasonal worker, on a charge of possessing cannabis for supply or sale at Glenroy, near Darfield, last October. Pullan was appearing for sentence before Judge Sheehan after earlier pleading guilty to the charge, before a scheduled jury trial was held. Imposing the prison sentence, the Judge said that notwithstanding Pullan’s previous clear record, the amount of cannabis involved — 2kg — justified a prison sentence. He said it was the more regrettable, because of Pullan’s background, intelligence and education, that he appeared before the Court on a charge of this nature. He had units of a bachelor’s degree and plans for completing a master’s degree. Pullan’s had -been studied and deliberate, the Judge said. The Judge said depositions evidence relating to the offence indicated that the police had little direct

evidence of Pullan’s dealing in cannabis, and had relied on the presumption, in law, because of the quantity found. Defence counsel, Mr P. H. B. Hall, had sought a lenient sentence, such as community service. He said Pullan had grown all the cannabis during the previous summer. He did not intend to sell or deal in the cannabis. Although there was a significant quantity of the drug, other people also stayed at the house. PERIODIC DETENTION Stephen Anthony Peart, aged 23, a seasonal worker, was sentenced to five months periodic detention on charges of possessing cannabis leaf at Glenroy near Darfield, last October 2, and administering a class C drug, phenobarbitone sodium, in Christchurch on May 4. The latter offence occurred on the day that a man was found dead, slumped against a lamp post in Bealey Avenue. The man Was found to have died from a drug overdose. Four persons, including Peart, were charged at the time with drug offences arising from the

matter. On a charge of failing to report to the probation officer on April 10, in breach of a year’s supervision order, Peart was ordered to come up for sentence within a year, if called upon. Mr Hall said in mitigation of penalty that the Crown had accepted that most of the cannabis found at the premises concerned had been grown by Pullan, and that Peart and others who stayed there had access to it. Mr Hall said that “probably the more serious charge” was that of administering a narcotic. It was not alleged by the police that Peart administered any drug to the man found dead. Another person involved in the episode had accepted that he administered a drug to the deceased and other persons. He was dealt with by the Court by a fine, as it was considered that it was not in j his contemplation thatj death could result from the drug. Peart had got involved with the wrong crowd, and this had resulted in his drug offending; Mr Hall said.