Cannabis Cultivation Charge NSW: No Conviction After 13 Plants Found
National Criminal Lawyers® | NSW Drug Offence & Section 10 Case Study
National Criminal Lawyers® recently achieved a no-conviction result for a 69-year-old client charged with cultivating a prohibited plant in NSW after police located 13 cannabis plants at his rural property.
Although 13 plants were located, negotiations with the prosecution resulted in agreed facts recognising that only three plants were viable and growing. The agreed facts also recorded that cultivation was rudimentary, that there was no sophisticated hydroponic or commercial cultivation equipment, and that there were no indicators of drug supply. The circumstances were recorded as being consistent with cultivation for personal use.
The client pleaded guilty at Moss Vale Local Court. On 22 September 2026, the Court found him guilty without proceeding to conviction and imposed a 12-month Conditional Release Order (CRO), commencing that day and expiring on 21 September 2027.
The cannabis cultivation charge
The client was charged with cultivating a prohibited plant contrary to section 23(1)(a) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). The prosecution case arose after police attended a rural property at High Range on 12 February 2026 and located cannabis plants growing in raised garden beds at the rear of the property.
The agreed facts ultimately recorded that police located 13 cannabis plants, of which three were viable and growing. The remaining plants were described as small, stunted or not properly growing. The plants were being cultivated in soil alongside ordinary vegetable plants, including leeks and silverbeet.
Importantly, the agreed facts did not describe a sophisticated or commercial cultivation operation. There was no sophisticated hydroponic system, lighting system or commercial cultivation equipment. There was also no evidence of regular harvesting, packaging materials, scales, resealable bags, cash or other indicators of supply. The agreed circumstances were consistent with cultivation for personal use.
How negotiations changed the factual basis of the case
An important part of the defence strategy occurred before sentence. National Criminal Lawyers® did not simply accept the prosecution’s proposed factual narrative. The factual basis upon which the client would plead guilty was carefully examined and representations were made so that the agreed facts accurately reflected the circumstances of the cultivation.
The client accepted responsibility for cultivating cannabis and was prepared to plead guilty to an appropriately framed charge. However, he disputed aspects of the prosecution’s proposed narrative. In particular, although 13 plants had been located, he maintained that only three were viable and properly growing. He also disputed the suggestion that the plants were three metres tall.
The representations sought to distinguish a rudimentary personal-use garden from a more serious commercial cultivation scenario. The agreed facts ultimately recorded the limited viability of most of the plants, the absence of sophisticated cultivation equipment and the absence of evidence associated with supply.
This demonstrates why early legal advice in a cannabis cultivation matter can be important. The precise factual basis upon which a person is sentenced can materially affect the way the offending is presented to the Court.
No evidence of cannabis supply or commercial cultivation
A key feature of the agreed facts was that there was no allegation of supply. Police did not identify packaging materials, scales, cash, resealable bags or other indicia of drug supply. The cultivation was in soil among ordinary vegetables rather than in a sophisticated hydroponic or commercial setup.
Those matters were relevant to the defence position that the objective seriousness of the offending should be assessed by reference to what had actually occurred, rather than by reference to a more serious cultivation or supply scenario.
The client’s personal circumstances
The client’s personal circumstances were also placed before the Court. He was 69 years old and had no prior criminal history. The agreed facts recorded that he had expressed remorse for his conduct and indicated that he would engage in counselling and explore lawful medical alternatives for pain management and sleep assistance.
The representations also addressed his history of volunteer work and medical issues he reported following volunteer work during the Australian bushfires. He explained that he had experienced ongoing pain and sleep disturbance and had used cannabis as a form of self-medication. The defence proposed that he engaged with appropriate counselling and explore lawful, medically supervised alternatives.
These circumstances did not excuse the offence, but they provided relevant personal context for the Court when determining the appropriate sentence.
Section 10 CRO without conviction
National Criminal Lawyers® sought an outcome in which the client could be dealt with without conviction. Under section 10 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), a court that finds a person guilty may, in an appropriate case, discharge the person under a Conditional Release Order without proceeding to conviction.
The Judicial Commission of NSW’s guidance on Section 10 orders explains that the Court considers the statutory factors and the individual circumstances of the case when deciding whether to make a non-conviction order.
In this matter, the client was found guilty, but the Court did not proceed to conviction. Instead, it imposed a 12-month CRO. The standard conditions required the client not to commit any offence while subject to the order and to appear before the Court if called upon to do so during its term.
Why the preparation mattered
This matter was not approached as a routine guilty plea. The defence considered the number and viability of the plants, the manner of cultivation, the absence of supply indicators, the client’s personal circumstances and the appropriate factual basis upon which the plea should proceed.
The representations also identified potential issues concerning alleged admissions made during a telephone conversation with police and whether the client had been cautioned before being questioned. Those matters formed part of the broader effort to narrow the issues and resolve the case without unnecessary litigation. Ultimately, the matter proceeded with agreed facts without the need for a contested factual hearing.
The result followed both the negotiated factual basis of the plea and the presentation of the client’s individual circumstances on sentence.
Moss Vale Local Court result: 12-month CRO without conviction
The matter was finalised at Moss Vale Local Court on 22 September 2026. The plea of guilty was accepted. The Court found the client guilty but, without proceeding to conviction, imposed a Conditional Release Order for 12 months, commencing on 22 September 2026 and expiring on 21 September 2027.
The result meant that no conviction was recorded for the cannabis cultivation offence.
Can you get a Section 10 for cultivating cannabis in NSW?
A Section 10 no-conviction outcome is legally available in appropriate cases after a person is found guilty. It is not automatic. The Court must consider the statutory criteria and the particular circumstances of the offence and the offender.
The outcome in this matter should not be treated as a prediction of what will happen in another case. The number and nature of the plants, the way they were cultivated, the existence or absence of supply evidence, the agreed facts, criminal history and personal circumstances can all differ significantly between cases.
Is growing cannabis for personal use illegal in NSW?
Personal use does not, by itself, make cultivation lawful. Section 23 of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) creates offences concerning the cultivation of prohibited plants. The purpose and circumstances of cultivation may nevertheless be relevant to the precise offence, the factual presentation of the case and sentence.
Does the number of cannabis plants matter in NSW?
The number of plants can be legally significant, but it is not the only factual consideration. In this case, the distinction between 13 plants being physically present and only three being viable and growing formed part of the negotiated factual basis. The method of cultivation and whether there is evidence of supply or commercial activity may also be relevant.
Can you avoid a conviction for a cannabis cultivation offence?
A court may deal with an offender without recording a conviction where the applicable sentencing discretion is exercised in that person’s favour. Whether that occurs depends upon the individual case. Here, the 69-year-old first offender received a 12-month CRO without conviction after the matter proceeded on negotiated agreed facts and his personal circumstances were placed before the Court.
Court orders confirming the no-conviction result
The redacted Moss Vale Local Court order confirms that the plea of guilty was accepted and that the client was found guilty without proceeding to conviction. It records the 12-month Conditional Release Order commencing on 22 September 2026 and expiring on 21 September 2027.
Recommended publication link: View the redacted Moss Vale Local Court order confirming the CRO without conviction.
Charged with cultivating cannabis or another drug offence in NSW?
National Criminal Lawyers® represents clients charged with cannabis cultivation and other prohibited plant offences throughout Sydney and New South Wales. Obtaining advice early can assist in identifying the available options, reviewing the prosecution facts and evidence, considering whether representations should be made and preparing the matter for hearing or sentence.
This case study concerns one recent matter handled by National Criminal Lawyers®. Past results do not guarantee a particular outcome. Every matter depends on its own facts and circumstances.
Read the Orders here:
