The dealer claimed that he didn't know that he was selling drugs to a child
A man convicted of supplying illegal drugs to a minor has sought on appeal to the High Court the defence that he held an “honest and reasonably mistaken belief” that his customer was actually an adult.
Chauncey Aaron Bell was indicted and tried on charges that included “supplying a controlled drug to a child” contrary to s 14 of the Misuse of Drugs Act 2001 after he sold methylamphetamine to the complainant, a 15-year-old girl. Bell told police that the complainant had said she was 20.
At trial, both Bell and the prosecution accepted that an “honest and reasonable mistaken belief” as to the girl’s age was available as a potential defence. But the trial judge told the jury that it made no difference if Bell held the belief that the girl was no longer a minor.
Following his conviction, Bell appealed to the Tasmania Supreme Court’s Court of Criminal Appeal (CCA), arguing that the trial judge’s instruction was erroneous. The CCA dismissed the appeal, saying that there were only two tests available for the defence of honest and reasonable mistaken belief: first, “the belief would render the conduct innocent of the offence charged”; second, “the belief would render the conduct innocent of any criminal charge whatsoever.”
The CCA held that the second test was applicable in Bell’s case and sustained his conviction.
In his High Court appeal, Bell sought for the court to quash his conviction, set aside his sentence and grant him a new trial. In its submission, the state acknowledged the “honest and reasonable mistaken belief” defence, but said that even “if genuinely held”, Bell’s belief was “only a mistake about the type of criminal offence he committed under the Misuse of Drugs Act 2001.”
The state said that the defence was irrelevant to his guilt, “but may be of some relevance to sentencing.”
The case is pending a decision by the High Court.
