Representing Cotton, barrister Eric Forster argued Judge Rea erred in relation to the absence of commerciality, and thus used an inappropriate "starting point" for the sentence.
Rea applied discounts for previous good record and character and an early guilty plea to a charge of possession for supply, for which the maximum available penalty is life imprisonment.
A judge for more than 23 years, Judge Rea started at four years, which compared with Forster's contention it should have been about two years and six months, and that deductions could have made his client eligible for home detention instead of imprisonment.
Quoting a Court of Appeal guideline decision, Justice Thomas said in relation to Cotton's offence the four-year starting point was "arguably at the lower end" of what was appropriate.
Cotton was referred to as having been in long-term employment as a flight attendant before his arrest, which happened as police investigated claims a car lent by Cotton to a friend and fellow methamphetamine user had been forcibly taken by another party.
Telling police he was not convinced about the claims and that he was concerned about the methamphetamine addictions of his friends, police put the question to Cotton who revealed he had methamphetamine in his possession, leading to the discovery of the 47 grams in two bags.
According to a pre-sentence report, Cotton did not consider himself a supplier or drug dealer, but shared it with friends.
He did not accept he had harmed the community, and was described as being naive about the dangers of drug use, prompting Judge Rea to say in July:
"Whether you see it as dealing or not is beside the point. The vast majority was for use by other people. Once you pass it on you've got no controls to what happens then."
