CDirector of Public Prosecutions v Liew
[2023] VCC 1474
•8 August 2023 18 August 2023
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No. CR-23-00093 (CL)
CR-23-00094 (KT)
CR-21-02643 (WL1)
CR-23-00097 (WL2)
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (Cth); and DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS (Vic) |
| v |
| CHRIS LIEW and and |
---
JUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE DALZIEL | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 12 July 2023 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 8 August 2023 18 August 2023 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | CDPP v Liew & Ors | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2023] VCC 1474 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:Criminal Law
Catchwords: Commonwealth offending – Sentencing – Attempt to import commercial quantity of border controlled drug – Methamphetamine – 36 times commercial quantity – Guilty pleas
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), Crimes Act 1958 (Vic); Criminal Code 1995 (Cth
Cases Cited:Akoka v The Queen [2017] VSCA 214.; DPP v Brown [2017] VSCA 162; DPP v Lawrence (2004) 10 VR 125, 132 [22]; DPP (Cth) v Peng [2014] VSCA 12; Mourkakos v R [2018] VSCA 26; Parks v R [2017] VSCA 232; Fernando v R [2017] VSCA 208; Nguyen & Phommalysack v The Queen (2011) 31 VR 673.
Sentence: Kelvin Tiong: Total Effective Sentence 10 years imprisonment. Non parole period 7 years 6 months.
Chris Liew: Total Effective Global Sentence 11 years imprisonment. Overall non parole period 8 years imprisonment
William Liu: Total Effective Global Sentence 13 years 6 months. Overall non-parole period 10 years 6 months.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Mr M. Keks with Ms Holmes | Office of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Accused Liew For the Accused Tiong For the Accused Liu | Mr D. Sala Mr A. Malik Mr G. Chipkin | Valos Black & Associates Valos Black & Associates Emma Turnbull Lawyers |
HER HONOUR:
1Each accused in this case has pleaded guilty to a charge of attempting to possess a commercial quantity of an unlawfully imported border controlled drug, namely methamphetamine, on 4 April 2022. This charge carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment.
2In addition to that charge each man faces other charges. William Liu also faces charges for drug trafficking on 6 August 2021, which I will summarise first.
William Liu – 6 August 2021 Offending
3On Friday 6 August 2021 police officers pulled over the car being driven by William Liu, after he carried out a hook turn improperly at the corner of Latrobe and Elizabeth Streets, in Melbourne CBD. Mr Liu was nervous and evasive when the police spoke to him. The police formed a reasonable suspicion that Mr Liu was in possession of a drug of dependence and they searched his car. They found:
(a) 3 resealable bags of a white powder believed to be Ketamine totalling 107.6 grams;
(b) $2,510 in Australian currency;
(c) 1 clear resealable bag containing 82 capsules of MDMA (Ecstasy) totalling 10.4 grams;
(d) 1 clear resealable bag containing Methylamphetamine;
(e) 1 clear resealable bag of a single capsule of MDMA weighing 8.4 grams;
(f) 1 vacuum sealed bag containing a block of Heroin weighing 64.7 grams;
(g) 42 boxes of tobacco (weighing approximately 63 kilograms).
4He was arrested. Police then searched three addresses connected to Mr Liu.
5At his home, in Buckingham Avenue Springvale his two flatmates, Warren and Benjamin, were spoken to and searched, but not arrested. Warren had with him a black Samsung mobile phone which was seized, and $1,545 in Benjamin's possession was seized as proceeds of crime.
6The flat in Buckingham Avenue was searched. Police seized the following items found in the living room:
(a) Two bags of Cannabis, one weighing 34.1 grams and the other 5.3 grams;
(b) 1 glass cylinder containing Cannabis weighing 46.9 grams;
(c) Various quantities of loose Cannabis weighing 21.5 grams, 0.71 grams, 112.9 grams, 404.3 grams, and uncut/dried Cannabis in a beer box weighing a total of 144.9 grams;
(d) 2 pucks of Cannabis weighing a total of 12.7 grams
(e) An electronic press;
(f) A manual capsule filling machine;
(g) Various bricks of sealed and pressed Tobacco, and multiple containers or bags of loose tobacco;
(h) $200 in Australian currency;
(i) 1 black Samsung mobile phone (which was seized); and
(j) 1 black Huawei mobile phone (also seized).
7Police further located 2 small Cannabis Plants on the balcony of the apartment weighing a total of 1.1 grams – these are the subject of Charge 7.
8Police then searched the first bedroom and seized the following items:
(a) Cannabis - 1 large bag weighing a total of 432.5 grams, 6 resealable bags with a total weight of 165.7 grams, several amounts of loose Cannabis weighing 103.8 grams, 95.3 grams, and 32.1 grams, a bag of chopped Cannabis weighing a total of 159.5 grams, and a container and a resealable bag of that drug weighing a total of 79.2 grams;
(b) A container of loose Methylamphetamine weighing 4.3 grams, 8 containers and a resealable bag containing that drug weighing a total of 60.9 grams, another resealable bag containing Methylamphetamine weighing 1.0 gram, and 18 containers of Methylamphetamine weighing a total of 74.0 grams;
(c) There were 5 resealable bags of Ketamine, and again I will not set out the details now but they are in my written reasons;
(d) A large box containing 31 bags of tobacco;
(e) 2 resealable bags containing a brown powdery substance (some of it was methylamphetamine and the rest MDMA;
(f) 2 resealable bags of white powder (being Cocaine) weighing a total of 52.1 grams;
(g) $36,605 in Australian currency.
9A search of the second bedroom located a further quantity of loose Cannabis weighing 177.2 grams.
10On Tuesday 10 August 2021 a search warrant was executed at Mr Liu's workplace, a Tobacconist in Buckingham Avenue, Springvale. Benjamin, Mr Liu's flatmate, was subsequently arrested and the following items were seized:
(a) 13 25 gram Tobacco pouches labelled ‘Black Jack’, and Tobacco kept in clip seal bags, or wrapped in aluminium foil.
(b) 2 Black folders containing various financial documents; and
(c) Various Business Documents in folders and envelopes.
11As the summary above indicates, drugs were found in various locations in a range of packaging. The total amounts alleged, in relation to the charges are:
§Charge 5 trafficking methylamphetamine in not less than a commercial quantity - was a total of 124 grams (pure) or 148.7 grams mixed substance. At the time the commercial quantity threshold of pure methylamphetamine was 50 grams and 250 grams if mixed with another substance;
§Charge 2 trafficking Ketamine – 128.1 grams;
§Charge 1 trafficking Heroin – 64.7 grams;
§Charge 4 trafficking Cocaine – 54.0 grams;
§Charge 3 trafficking MDMA – 10.7 grams; and
§Charge 6 trafficking Cannabis – 2,028.6 grams.
12Mr Liu has also pleaded guilty to a charge pursuant to s195 of the Crimes Act 1958 in respect to the many and substantial amounts of tobacco, also to a charge of entering an intersection against a red light, related to the hook turn that led to him being pulled over by the police, and a charge of Committing an Indictable Offence on Bail.
13He was charged and remanded in custody. On 7 October 2021 he was granted bail. He indicated on 10 December 2021 that he would plead not guilty and the matter was committed to this Court, without a contested committal. These charges resolved on 6 February 2023, and he was arraigned and pleaded guilty to these charges on 17 February 2023.
Commonwealth Indictment
14On 18 March 2022 a consignment, addressed to a business in York Street, South Melbourne was intercepted by law enforcement authorities in the USA. The consignment was declared to be two pallets of LED lanterns, with a gross weight of 453 kilograms.
15Methamphetamine was concealed in the lanterns in the consignment. The authorities in the USA advised Victoria Police Joint Taskforce Icarus of the interception. The drug was removed and the consignment forwarded to Australia for investigation.
16Analysis of the drugs established that the consignment had contained 33.717 kilograms of mixed methamphetamine. Its purity was 80.3 per cent, and so the total weight of pure methamphetamine was 27.0747 kilograms. At the time, the Commonwealth Criminal Code prescribed the commercial quantity of pure methamphetamine at 750 grams. The seized methamphetamine was therefore around 36 times the commercial quantity of that drug.
17The consignment arrived in the country on around 29 March 2022 and was seized.
18A listening device was concealed in the consignment by the investigators, and it was delivered to a legitimate logistics company on 4 April 2022. That evening, at around 6 pm, it was delivered to an address in Nottingwood Street, Doncaster East, where Chris Liew and Kelvin Tiong assisted the driver to unload the two pallets and put them in the garage of the property.
Events leading up to delivery
19Each of the accused is charged with attempting to take possession of a border controlled drug which had been concealed in the consignment. The charge is an attempt because the drug had been removed. The charge relates specifically to their conduct on 4 August 2022, however there is evidence about their acts before that time which provides some indication of their state of awareness about the nature of the contents of the consignment, about the quantity of border controlled drug they believed was arriving, and which demonstrates their role and culpability.
20Analysis of the phones of the accused men shows that each was acting at the direction of a person or persons who were responsible for the importation of the consignment. Mr Liew was in communication with a person named 'JJ' via WeChat, Mr Tiong was in communication with 'Mel M' via Telegram and William Liu was in contact with 'M MMM' via Signal. The prosecution position is that JJ, Mel M and M MMM were the same person or closely associated.
21The Nottingwood Street property was leased on 18 February 2022 by a person using the name of Boyan YAO. Documents in that name were later found at Mr Tiong's home.
22On 15 March 2022 Mel M directed Mr Tiong to purchase tools to be used in deconstructing the consignment and extracting the drugs. Mel M told Mr Tiong to get some money from Mr Chris Liew. The same day Mr Tiong purchased various items from Bunnings, including a respirator, coveralls and bolt cutters. These items were in Chris Liew's possession when he was arrested.
23Mel M told Mr Tiong to purchase some other items. Mr Tiong and Chris Liew went to a different Bunnings and purchased a drill kit, which was later found at the Nottingwood Street property.
24The next day, 16 March 2022, Mel M told Mr Tiong that the tools would be used for 'next time'.
25On 24 March 2022 Mel M asked Mr Tiong if a 5-Tonne truck with a lift gate could get inside the garage of 'that house'. Mr Tiong was doubtful and told Mel M that the drive was steep and the door of the garage 'seems to be just a bit higher than Chris’s height.' This was a reference to Chris Liew.
26As part of that conversation the address of the Nottingwood Street property was confirmed. Mel M told Mr Tiong to buy and install security cameras, and to discuss this with Chris Liu. Mel M told Mr Tiong 'With that job in relation to the tools bought last time, work commences today'; 'When the stuff arrives, get in the gear and then commence work'.
27The next day, 25 March 2022, Mr Tiong messaged Chris Liew saying that 'brother' had directed them to buy two security cameras. Also on that day Mel M told Mr Tiong that 'it couldn’t be delivered today. Just made contact, was told the delivery will be on Wednesday'.
28On 29 March William Liu messaged M MMM, asking 'The stuff coming will be powder anyway right?'
29On 30 March 2022 Mr Tiong and Mr Chris Liew collected two security cameras which Mr Chris Liew had ordered in his own name from JB Hi-Fi. A short time later Chris Liew's car was at the Nottingwood Street property' for around an hour and a half. It left at 2.15 pm. At 2.16 pm Mr Tiong messaged Mel M saying that he had bought the cameras for $1,200 and sent images of them installed at the Nottingwood Street house. The prosecution say that both Mr Tiong and Chris Liew installed the cameras, which is not in dispute.
30A further exchange between Mr Tiong and Mel M on 30 March 2022 is relied upon by the prosecution to show that Mr Tiong was aware that Mel M was involved in ongoing importations.[1]
[1]Summary of Prosecution Opening for Plea dated 13 June 2023, [33].
31On 31 March 2022 M MMM sent the following message to William Liu: 'U know what, that thing still not clearance'; 'I think it’s dead'; 'Waiting for 4 days already'. Later that day, 'M MMM' said: 'My friend said clearance successful'; 'I’ll let you know soon bro!'; 'The pork'. During the conversation, 'M MMM' and William Liu referred to '30kg' and a 'pallet'.
32The prosecution submit that it can be inferred from those conversations that Mr Liu knew that the consignment would contain around 30 kilograms of methamphetamine.
33On 1 April 2022 Chris Liew and JJ exchanged messages. JJ told Mr Liew 'Might need to start work today'; and 'Damn It. No more warehouses. Otherwise, might just have to go to that one in the suburbs'. Later, JJ said: 'I reckon work will start on Monday' (which was going to be 4 April 2022); 'Haven’t collected it yet today'.
34On that day, Chris Liew sent videos of Nottingwood Street to 'JJ' and made a call with a duration of 64 seconds to Mr Tiong, via Telegram
35Also on 1 April 2022, 'M MMM' asked William Liu, 'Bro we meet tonight?' and Liu replied: 'Yup ok'; 'I have the scanner'.
4 April 2022
36At 10.10 am JJ told Chris Liew that he and Mr Tiong should to go to the 'property in the suburbs' at 4 pm. At 2.59 pm M MMM messaged William Liu telling him that 'they' were on the way to 'pick up now', and that he would let Mr Liu know around 4 pm. M MMM asked Mr Liu 'U want to come to Doncaster?' William Liu relied that he was already in Doncaster, and to let him know.
37At 2.50 pm JJ again directed Mr Tiong and Chris Liew to go to the place in the suburbs, and then at 4 pm said that 'He’s going to collect the goods now.'
38Chris Liew and Kelvin Tiong arrived at the Nottingwood Street house in separate vehicles shortly after 4 pm. The consignment was collected by the delivery driver at around 4.30 pm.
39Whilst Mr Liew and Mr Tiong were waiting at the house, Mr Liew exchanged messages with JJ. He received updates about the delivery and instructions about what they should do when it arrived, including that they should take photographs and videos of the consignment before unpacking it.
40At 4.42 pm M MMM messaged William Liu, giving him the precise address in Nottingwood Street. He told Mr Liu that it would be there in an hour, and to 'Plz bring the scanner.'
41At 4.56 pm JJ messaged Chris Liew asking if he could speak Cantonese, as the person who would arrive, that is William Liu, could speak English or Cantonese, but was not fluent in Mandarin.
42At 5.50 pm Mr Tiong and Mr Chris Liew took tools and items to be used to deconstruct the consignment out of the boot of Mr Tiong's car, and into the garage.
43The delivery driver arrived at 6.05 pm. Mr Tiong and Mr Liew helped unload the two pallets and get them into the garage.
44At 6.06 pm M MMM messaged William Liu telling him the consignment had arrived, and three minutes later messaged him again asking if he was there.
45At 6.13 pm Chris Liew messaged JJ confirming that the consignment had arrived. At 6.20 pm JJ responded telling Mr Liew to video the whole thing, and complaining that William Liu had not replied to him. He said 'Later if he’s still not replying me, just open it directly'; 'Worst case scenario I’ll say that I couldn’t find the machine today'.
46William Liu arrived at the property at 6.23 pm. He had a Radio Frequency scanner with him.
47Shortly after William Liu arrived Mr Tiong had a conversation in Mandarin with a person he called 'Brother O'. This was probably JJ/Mel M/M MMM. Brother O told them to turn on the machine and 'sweep' the pallets one by one. He told them to video and photograph this occurring. Mr Tiong said he would do so and send the images to Brother O. Mr Tiong asked William Liu if he knew what to do, Brother O said 'yes, this person knows'.
48After that conversation, between 6.36 pm and 6.52 pm Mr Tiong sent photos and videos of the two parts of the consignment to Mel M. At 6.54 pm Mr Tiong filmed Mr Liu scanning the consignment with the RF detector. The detector picked up the signal from the listening device in the consignment.
49Mr Tiong messaged Mel M 'Brother'; 'There’s a problem'; 'We haven’t even started and there’s already a signal'. 'Mel M' responded: 'What the fuck?'; 'Can only fucking retreat then…'. Mr Tiong sent Mel M the video of William Liu sweeping the pallets with the RF detector. 'Mel M' told him to 'ask my friend' what to do (that was a reference to William Liu).
50At 6.56 pm the listening device captured the sound of the garage doors opening and closing. Each of the accused fled the house to their respective cars. They were intercepted nearby and arrested.
Search and Seizure
51In the garage of the Nottingwood Street house the investigators found the tools which had been purchased to deconstruct the consignment, and cigarette butts with the DNA of each accused on them.
Chris Liew
52Mr Liew was driving a black Lexus sedan. The following items of significance were found in that car:
(a) A semi-automatic rifle wrapped in a towel and concealed in a cardboard box on the back seat. The magazine of this rifle had a capacity for 20 cartridges, but was unloaded. Charge 2—possessing a unregistered category C or category D longarm;
(b) There was an international mail parcel originating from France, addressed to 'Sophie Han', it contained resealable plastic bags with quantities of methamphetamine with purities between 48 and 80.3 per cent, total weight of 1,874.6 grams of pure methamphetamine. This was around 2.5 times a commercial quantity threshold of 750 grams, that is the Commonwealth commercial quantity threshold. The parcel also included 487.2 grams of a cutting agent. Chris Liew’s possession of the methamphetamine is Charge 3— possess a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug reasonably suspected of having been unlawfully imported;
(c) The same parcel contained resealable plastic bags with quantities of ketamine with purities between 78.9 per cent and 86.2 percent, totalling 44.4 grams of pure ketamine;
(d) A cigarette packet contained a resealable plastic bag with 27.7 grams of ketamine with a purity of 78.9 per cent, so a total of 21.8 grams of pure ketamine. The combined amounts of pure ketamine were 66.2 grams, and is the subject of Charge 4, possession of a controlled drug.The 66.2 grams is around 22 times the traffickable quantity threshold of 3 grams;
(e) There were 2 yellow and white capsules containing 2.1 grams of MDMA with a purity of 78.4 per cent, that is a total of 1.6 grams pure Charge 5—possessing a controlled drug.
(f) There were gold-coloured knuckle dusters in the driver's door pocket, giving rise to Summary Charge 6—possessing a prohibited weapon.
53Mr Chris Liew only had a learner's permit, and so has also plead guilty to Summary Charge 2 for driving without an accompanying driver and to Summary Charges 3 and 4 for failing to display a learner's plate on the front and rear of the car.
54The following day Chris Liew's home was searched. Investigators found resealable plastic bags, digital scales and a vacuum sealer. Also seized were:
(a) an Airsoft shotgun with two cartridges, Summary Charge 10;
(b) an Airsoft handgun, Summary Charge 11; and
(c) a black Laser longarm, Summary Charge 12—each of which is a charge of possessing an imitation firearm.
55Mr Liew's mobile phone was analysed. Investigators found the chats with JJ noted earlier, and also discussions regarding the renting of properties to be used for deliveries, payments were made to Chris Liew, and bank details for international transactions. There were images of white crystal and powder substances being weighed, images of white powder in bags, of deconstruction of international packages, and videos showing parcels addressed to other people including Boyan Yao.
Kelvin Tiong
56Kelvin Tiong's vehicle was searched and investigators found an Apple iPhone, digital scales, resealable plastic bags, a silver bowl with white powder residue, and the key to the back door of the Nottingwood Street house. At his home they found documents in the name of Boyan YAO in whose name, as I have said, the Nottingwood Street house had been leased.
57Mr Tiong had a Learner's permit at the time and so is charged with having no supervising driver beside him and failing to display front and rear L plates. (Summary Charges 2, 3 and 4).
58Later analysis of Mr Tiong's mobile phone found videos of the deconstruction of another consignment addressed to Boyan YAO, images and videos sent by Mr Tiong to Mel M showing people dealing with substances extracted from various items, and discussions regarding locating rental properties for deliveries.
William Liu
59In Mr William Liu's car police found an ice pipe, the RF detector and the gloves worn by him in the video of him scanning the consignment.
60Mr William Liu's licence was suspended and he was also therefore charged with Summary Charge 3, Driving Whilst Suspended.
61His home was searched. The items seized there include an Oppo mobile phone, a hydraulic press, 5.9 grams of methamphetamine with a purity of 80.3 per cent, totalling therefore 4.7 grams pure. This was 2.35 times a traffickable quantity (2 grams). Charge 6—possessing a controlled drug
62At the time of this offending Mr Liu was on bail and thus he pleaded guilty also to Summary Charge 2, committing an indictable offence whilst on bail.
63On 10 May 2022 William Liu refused to comply with an order under s3LA of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) when he failed to provide the PIN to the Oppo mobile phone. He said the phone was not his, which proved to be false once the police were able to access the content of that device. The messages between Mr William Liu and M MMM to which I have referred earlier were found on that Oppo mobile phone. Mr Liu has agreed that the offence of failing to comply with an order under s3LA of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) (serious offence) should be taken into account, pursuant to s16BA of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), when I am passing sentence on Charge 1 on the Commonwealth indictment.
Chris Liew Personal Circumstances
64Chris Liew is presently 21 years old. He was 20 at the time of the offending. He was born in Malaysia. His parents separated when he was a child and he was raised by his grandmother.
65Mr Liew had limited contact with his parents as a child. He has little memory of his mother. He describes seeing his father being in physical fights with other people, but because his father worked as a logger he was not present often.
66Mr Liew resumed contact with his mother when he was 9 or 10 and had sporadic contact with her, one or two times a year, after that.
67His education ceased when he was 15, in about Year 9. He found school difficult and did not enjoy it. He reports being bullied and feeling like the odd one out. He was suspended once for striking someone who verbally abused him.
68After he had finished school, he had some casual work in Malaysia, before deciding at age 16 to come and live in Australia; he followed his father who had moved here some years earlier.
69Once in Australia, Mr Liew had a series of jobs, such as delivering junk mail, labouring and working in the nightclub industry. It was in that last area that he developed an addiction to both ketamine and methylamphetamine and used other drugs such as cocaine and MDMA.
70He has little contact now with his family, except for his grandmother. He has had limited contact with her since being on remand, as he has not wanted to worry her about his situation. He reports ongoing conflict with his father. He has occasional contact with his mother.
71I was told that Chris Liew's situation was difficult during the COVID-19 years and the lockdowns. His visa status limited what government benefits he could receive and work was limited. He did find work as a plasterer but he lost this work due to his drug addiction.[2] An additional barrier to finding work is the level of his English language skills.
[2]Psychological Report of Naomi Cameron dated 18 June 2023, [25]
72Mr Liew reports that he was stabbed in a street fight in 2021, but he did not report any ongoing impairment nor psychological consequences[3]
[3]Ibid, [32].
73He reported to Ms Cameron that he has few good friends, and whilst he had a girlfriend at the time of this offending, he is unsure whether she will continue her relationship with him.
74Ms Cameron noted that Mr Liew reported to her a history of anxiety, particularly when alone, and some social anxiety. These symptoms were not frequent nor did they significantly impact his functioning.[4] He also reported feeling suicidal in the past in the context of being in a perilous financial situation and feeling useless. He did not act on these feelings.[5] He had trouble sleeping in the past, for which he took sleeping medication.[6]
[4]Ibid, [30].
[5]Ibid, [31].
[6]Ibid, [33].
75Whilst in custody he focuses on exercise.
76Mr Liew told Ms Cameron that he fell into excessive drinking of alcohol and using drugs of dependence in the context of working in the nightclub industry. He liked how the drugs made him feel. He accepted that his use of these drugs – MDMA, ketamine, nitrous oxide and methamphetamine was problematic, and interfered with his ability to hold employment. He told Ms Cameron that he had never done any alcohol or drug rehabilitation and it was doubtful, he considered, that it would help him.
77It seems that Mr Liew got involved in the syndicate, and thus this offending, due to financial strain and his drug consumption. Ms Cameron notes that he was guarded and anxious when talking about the offending, and he was coy about what financial reward he would receive.[7]
[7]Psychological Report of Naomi Cameron dated 18 June 2023, [42]-[45]
78He expressed a desire to find work following his sentence, and that he would disassociate himself from past associates.
79I note the following from Ms Cameron's assessment:
§Mr Liew was guarded which might have explained his absence of verbal reporting of depression or anxiety in contrast to the testing.
§he displayed limited insight into the offending and his reasons for becoming involved.
§he accepted he had a problem with the abuse of drugs, but was not at a point where he desired to address that through counselling or other intervention. Formal testing was indicative of 'a definite history of severe drug-related problems' and placed him in the high-risk range for harmful substance use at the time of offending[8] and he had a definite history of hazardous and harmful drinking.[9]
§formal testing indicated mild levels of depression, severe levels of anxiety and normal levels of stress.[10]
§Ms Cameron assessed Mr Liew's risk of reoffending as low to moderate.
[8]Ibid, [59], [76]
[9]Ibid, [63]
[10]Ibid, [55].
80Ms Cameron said:
“it appears that Mr Liew was acutely intoxicated during the commission of the offending due to his comorbid substance use disorders, which may have created behavioural disturbance.”[11]
I could not see a basis for that opinion, in her report. Whilst I accept that Chris Liew had an ongoing addiction to various illicit drugs, there is nothing before me which suggests he was affected by such substances on 4 April 2022. The offending occurred in the context of an ongoing business relationship with his contact in the syndicate, and preparatory work for the arrival of the consignment.
[11]Ibid, [77].
81Of more assistance to me in understanding why Mr Liew became involved in this offending are the following matters noted by Ms Cameron:[12]
§First, he was in financial difficulty, and he lacked skills to find appropriate legitimate employment;
§Next, he had low self-esteem and susceptibility to negative peer influences;
§Third, he lacked positive social supports in the community, such as family or pro-social friends; and
§Fourth, his age and immaturity.
[12]Psychological Report of Naomi Cameron dated 18 June 2023, [78]-[80].
Plea of Guilty and extent of cooperation with the authorities
82A significant factor in mitigation is that Chris Liew has pleaded guilty to these charges. He indicated that he would plead guilty at a relatively early stage, following a contested committal. The case against him was very strong, but this does not reduce the utilitarian value of his pleas, which provides a real benefit to the courts, and hence the community, in terms of the saving of time and expense that would be associated with a trial. I accept that the weight in mitigation afforded in this respect is somewhat greater, given the lingering impact of the pandemic on the operations of the court, but I note that the delays and time pressures which were acute at the time in the decision in Worboyes, are now diminished.
83The pleas of guilty are an acceptance of responsibility for this offending. Chris Liew also told Ms Cameron that he repented and felt regretful of the offending, and understood that his incarceration was deserved. I accept that Mr Liew does regret his offending.
84When he was interviewed by the police, Mr Liew made some admissions but also made implausible denials regarding the items in the car. He did provide the police with information enabling them to access his phone.
Youth
85Mr Liew was 20 at the time of the offending and is now 21. He had no prior convictions.
86It is well established that when sentencing a young offender, the court should be mindful of the immaturity of such offenders and the potential for the rehabilitation of such young people. Promotion of the rehabilitation of young offenders is a significant consideration in sentencing them, benefitting both the offender and the community. Furthermore, exposing a young person who is immature and still developing their place in the world to adult custody is likely to be detrimental to their rehabilitation, which can in turn negatively impact the community. Because of the importance of rehabilitation, general deterrence will usually carry less weight.
87On the other hand, the offending for which Chris Liew falls to be sentenced is serious. Charge 1 and Charge 3 both carry a maximum penalty of life imprisonment. This impacts the weight to be given to the offender's prospects of rehabilitation.[13] Whilst not violent offending, such as was in the case of DPP v Lawrence, Charges 1 and 2 are of such a nature that general deterrence, specific deterrence and denunciation must carry real weight in the sentencing exercise.
[13]DPP v Lawrence (2004) 10 VR 125, 132 [22].
88In this case I do not consider that the issue of Mr Liew's prospects for rehabilitation and promoting his rehabilitation 'takes a back seat'[14] to the other sentencing considerations, but at the same time I do not accept defence counsel's submission that the principles in Mills lead to a significant reduction in his sentences.
[14]Ibid.
Remand and Custody
89Ms Cameron considered that prison would weigh more heavily on Mr Liew than upon someone without his mental health issues, in particular noting his high levels of stress.[15] I will moderate the sentences to a degree on this basis.
[15]Psychological Report of Naomi Cameron dated 18 June 2023 [83].
90It was also submitted that Chris Liew's time in custody would be made more difficult due to his concerns about being deported, on completion of his sentence, and that in view of his immigration status, the offending and the likely sentence, it was nearly inevitable that he would be deported. Mr Sala submitted that after 4 years here, a significant portion of his client's life at this stage, and with his father still here, deportation would have a detrimental effect on him and he would be concerned about that.
91I do not consider that this factor carries any real weight in the sentencing discretion. Mr Liew's connections to the community here in Australia are limited. The relationship with his girlfriend was short at the time of the offending and unlikely to survive his incarceration. He is effectively estranged from his father, he reported, and he appears to have no enduring friendships with pro-social people. He has found it difficult to find legitimate work. Whilst I accept that he has now lived out of Malaysia for a considerable portion of his young life, he does have family there, and on return will not face the language barriers that have impacted him here.
92I accept that he has been and will be isolated on remand, due to his lack of facility with English, and lack of community contacts.
93I was given no specific information about the extent to which his time on remand has been impacted by the pandemic, but I take into account that there have been increased lockdowns and lack of opportunities for work or education for all people in custody during this time.
Prospects of Rehabilitation & Specific Deterrence
94Having regard to the extent of Chris Liew's involvement with the syndicate and the range of offences for which he falls to be sentenced, I consider that his prospects of rehabilitation are moderate. Whilst he is young, and rehabilitation is something that is to be promoted, he is aimless, without pro-social supports aside from his grandmother, has limited education and very little insight into his drug abuse. His response to Ms Cameron's questions about his substance issues[16] and plans to discontinue associating with the co-accused and other anti-social associates[17] strike me as glib. Even if he was sincere, follow-through is difficult, particularly without friends or family to assist.
[16]Psychological Report of Naomi Cameron dated 18 June 2023 [50].
[17]Ibid, [46].
95Whilst Ms Cameron assessed his risk of reoffending as low to moderate, I have come to a different view, principally because I am less accepting of his stated intentions regarding his future plans.
96In view of the risk of Mr Liew returning to offending I consider specific deterrence has real weight in the sentencing exercise.
97It was submitted that in order to promote Mr Liew's rehabilitation, a shorter than usual non parole period should be imposed. I agree that a period of supervision in the community would be of benefit to Mr Liew, and thus to the community, but in view of the length of the sentences which I will impose this can be achieved by imposing a non-parole period within the broad range which usually applies.
Kelvin Tiong Personal Circumstances
98Mr Tiong was 24 at the time of the offending. He recently turned 26 on 27 July 2023. He was born and raised in Malaysia and is the eldest of three boys. His parents are Chinese, but he has never lived in that country.
99He reported disharmony in the family as he grew up, with his parents arguing a lot. Aside from those arguments he says he was quite happy. His father was a mechanic. He reports that his mother physically disciplined him, but he grew accustomed to this. His mother had a gambling addiction and became indebted to loan sharks. The family went bankrupt. He feels resentment towards his mother for her behaviour and the impact on the family.
100Mr Tiong reports that he stayed at school until the equivalent of Year 10, but that he was a poor student and misbehaved, although he was not specific as to how. He enjoyed martial arts training.
101Once he left school he travelled around Malaysia, finding casual positions in the hospitality industry and learning to repair air conditioners. He had no contact with his family for around 2 years, but after that made contact with his father and brother again.
102Mr Tiong came to Australia in February 2018 on a working Tourist Visa. He told Ms Lechner that he then applied for refugee status on the basis of 'hardship' being debts in Malaysia. What he meant by this is unclear, and it is not suggested he is an asylum seeker. His visa has since been cancelled.
103In Australia he worked in cash in hand jobs, in restaurants and labouring. He reported that he found it difficult to make ends meet financially.
104During his years in Australia Mr Tiong apparently had developed limited English skills, something he has been addressing whilst on remand.[18] He was assisted by an interpreter in the assessment by Ms Lechner and on the plea hearing.
[18]KT3 – Kangan TAFE letter dated 24 February 2023.
105He has no prior convictions.
Mental Health
106Ms Lechner considered that Mr Tiong presented with symptoms of a Major Depressive Disorder, in part related to his legal proceedings and in part a continuation of lowered mood, present since his teenage years. She thought he was likely of low average intelligence and that he was socially and emotionally immature.[19] He sees the world as threatening and hostile, and himself as a victim of circumstances.
[19]Psychologist Report of Carla Lechner dated 25 May 2023, pg 3.
107He has little contact with his family and his girlfriend and friends have faded away since his arrest.
108Ms Lechner considered that Mr Tiong had chronic low self-esteem and low self‑confidence and was without guidance in his adolescent years. That may well be the case, but the contribution of this to his reasons for his offending, as opined by Ms Lechner,[20] is neither compelling nor mitigating.
[20]Ibid page 5, paragraph 3, 4.
Drug Abuse
109Mr Tiong reported trying methylamphetamine when he was 17 or 18 years old, before coming to Australia; he said that he did not have the funds to form a habit for that drug. After being in Australia for a year he resumed that drug, but states that he quit in 2021, because he was 'sick of it'. He said he used MDMA from time to time but not other drugs. Alcohol is not problematic for him.
110The explanation given to Ms Lechner for his involvement in this offending is that he was working on a building site but having money problems. He says he was offered 1-2 hours of work and would be paid $1,000. He said he thought it might be drugs but did not think about that, being focussed on the money. He said he felt pressure to support his girlfriend and send money home to his mother and father.
111That explanation is not convincing. It does not deal with the contact Mr Tiong had with the syndicate contact for the days prior to 4 of April, and makes no mention of his involvement in buying tools, the cameras and installing them. It also ignores the images on his phone of other consignments being unpacked, and the discussion about rental properties. His statement that he wanted to send money to his mother and father is inconsistent with his reported estrangement from both of them.[21]
[21]For example Psychologist Report of Carla Lechner dated 25 May 2023 page 5 paragraph 2.
Remand
112As to his likely deportation, Mr Tiong told Ms Lechner that he had hoped to stay in Australia because he liked it here, but now that his girlfriend has a new boyfriend, he has given up hope and that if he is sent back to Malaysia he will spend time with his father and grandmother. In contrast to defence counsel's submissions, it appears that Mr Tiong will not be worried about the prospect of deportation whilst in custody but is rather resigned to it.
113I accept that he will be isolated whilst in custody, with no one in the community here who will visit or call him. His English skills will add to his isolation whilst in custody, but it is a positive sign that he has been studying English whilst on remand.
114In addition to studying English, Mr Tiong is working in the kitchen and going to the gym.
115Ms Lechner considered that Mr Tiong's chronic low mood, or depression, would likely be aggravated by a long prison sentence, in which he would be isolated and lonely. I accept that this mitigates his sentence to a small degree.
116I take into account also, as I do in respect to all of the accused, that his time on remand since arrest in April 2022 has been impacted by the pandemic with increased lockdowns and less opportunities for courses. No evidence was put before me about the details of this in respect to any of these men, and I take it into account in a general way.
Plea of Guilty, Remorse & degree of cooperation with the authorities
117Mr Tiong indicated that he would plead guilty to these charges at an early opportunity. Whilst there was a committal no witnesses were cross-examined on his behalf at that hearing. I accept that the pleas of guilty are of significant utilitarian value, by saving the community the trouble and expense of a trial, added to by the lingering effects of pandemic, although I note that those effects are waning. I note also that pleas of guilty may be an indicator of some remorse, in addition to accepting responsibility.
118Ms Lechner considered Mr Tiong was 'deeply regretful of his offending as [his] future here is now in considerable doubt.'[22] I have no doubt he regrets being caught in this offending, and the consequences of that, but this is far from contrition or an understanding of why this conduct was unlawful and the harm that could have been caused to the community.
[22]Psychologist Report of Carla Lechner dated 25 May 2023 page 5 paragraph 1.
119I was not told of any additional acts by Mr Tiong which assisted the authorities.
Prospects of Rehabilitation
120I do not accept that Mr Tiong has 'excellent' prospects of rehabilitation, as was submitted by defence counsel. I do accept he has reasonable prospects. He appears to have become involved in this syndicate, and the specific offending, out of a desire to make money. He was capable of consequential thinking but did not exercise sound judgment, or make a good decision about being involved. According to Ms Lechner, this was in part due to his ongoing self-image issues. I would expect that the significant sentence he will receive should act as a deterrent upon him from committing offences in the future.
William Liu Personal Circumstances
121Mr Liu is now 38 years old. He was 37 at the time of this offending. He was born in Melbourne, and is an Australian citizen. He has two younger siblings.
122His parents were refugees from the war in Vietnam. They worked hard to establish themselves, with his father working as a chef and his mother working in factories and in caring for the family. He states that he was physically disciplined as a child and teen, which he resented. He reports feeling unloved and abandoned by his parents, due to their long working hours, and this led to him associating with bad company, who were involved in drugs, and older than him. I note that his parents continue to be there for him and he resumed living with them prior to his arrest - sorry, prior to the April 2022 offending.
123At the age of 13, Mr Liu moved out of the family home to live with a friend of the family. He stayed there for around one year. He then moved back into the family home, where he stayed until he was around 20.
124Mr Liu did well at school, although he was expelled in Year 9 for fighting. He went on to complete Year 12 and achieved an ENTER score of 92. He enrolled in an aerospace engineering degree, but failed to keep up with the course work and so dropped out after one semester.
125A letter from his sister provided on the plea describes how he looked out for his sister and younger brother, and the added role he took on in caring for his siblings while his parents were at work. She writes about his successes at school and in VCE, and getting into his Engineering degree. She considers that the support he provided her helped her success in her own career. She writes of Mr Liu's ongoing financial support for his younger brother, and his involvement in her own family, for example taking her son to swimming each week, helping her husband's business and doing electrical work for them.
126After dropping out of his university course, Mr Liu commenced and completed an electrical apprenticeship. He worked as an electrician, which he liked, but his addition to illicit drugs impacted his ability to work, and eventually he ceased that line of employment. The letters provided in support of him on the plea indicate that he has tried his hand at a range of businesses, and at the time of the offending in 2021 he was working in a tobacconist store.
Drug Abuse
127The negative peer group that Mr Liu began to associate with when he was in early adolescence introduced him to MDMA, then Cannabis and methylamphetamine. He reports that he continued to use illicit drugs through his teens, and indeed up until the time of his arrest. His usage had escalated for the 10 years or so prior to his arrest in 2021 on the State charges, and he reports that he was smoking up to 3.5 grams of methylamphetamine a day. This would be an extraordinarily high amount of that drug to consume daily. He reported also that he was using GHB regularly, and that paying for these drugs was a significant financial outlay.
128He also reports that he was deep into the party and drug scene, and hopelessly addicted to drugs and that lifestyle. Not long before the pandemic began he started playing poker machines, which also became problematic for him.
129When bailed on the State offences he completed a four month residential rehabilitation program at The Cottage, in Shepparton. The letters from that organisation state that he was a resident there from 8 October 2021 to around February 2022. He responded well to the program, expressed a firm commitment to recover from substance abuse, and to change his life. His urine screens were clear and he was pro-active and participated fully.
130Regrettably, Mr Liu not only relapsed from the progress he had made at The Cottage, but he became involved in the checking of the consignment on 4 April 2022, and then was found to be in possession of 5.9 grams of mixed methylamphetamine (which was 4.9 grams pure) when his vehicle was searched.
131Mr Liu told Mr Cummins that he found it hard to adjust to normal life when he left The Cottage, and he quickly returned to his drug using lifestyle, which had the appeal of intoxication, gambling and casual sex.[23]
[23]Psychological report - Jeffery Cummins dated 23 June 2023 [25].
132It was submitted on his behalf that the circumstances in which he commenced drug use, at age 13, had the effect of reducing his moral culpability. I accept that where a person becomes addicted at an early age, well before being able to make sound and sensible decisions, this can mean that addiction and drug abuse at the time of the offending may reduce the offender's culpability.
133Mr Liu's initial drug use was apparently due to his association with negative and older peers. He was young, and necessarily immature. He was unhappy at home. It is not the case, however, that he turned to drugs as a surcease for trauma. His parents were busy, and whilst he resented the lack of attention they were able to give him and he reports physical discipline, there was no domestic violence or other forms of abuse. His drug use as a teenager did not apparently affect his ability to achieve a very good VCE result and to begin an Engineering degree. In respect to his dropping out of that course, I was told that he was then regularly using drugs, and also that he did not keep up with the course work. These two explanations are not of course, mutually exclusive.
134Relevantly, he reports that his drug use escalated to significant levels in the last 10 years or so, around the time he finished his electrical apprenticeship and started working in that trade.[24] The reference from his former employer refers to him working as an electrician for around three years.
[24]Psychological report - Jeffery Cummins dated 23 June 2023 [17].
135I am mindful of the authority to which I was referred, and I accept that Mr Liu was young and immature when he commenced trying drugs. The extent and regularity of his drug use over his teenage years has not been set out, but, as I have noted, he did very well academically at secondary school. On his own report his drug use escalated in his late 20s, and he did not come before the courts for drug related offending until 2019. Furthermore, whilst it has been put that his drug addiction, and the need to fund it, was the cause of his offending, he was not engaged in low level dealing, from which he could eke out the funds or small amounts of drug, to meet his own habits.
136I do not accept that in the circumstances in which Mr Liu was first introduced to drugs, at a young age, that this results in a reduction of his moral culpability. His descent into a drug using lifestyle occurred in his late 20s, and he enjoyed the hedonism of it.
Mental Health
137Mr Liu reported to Mr Cummins that he had self-harmed as a teenager, and later tried to suicide twice, by drug overdose. One of these attempts appears to have been related to the failure of a business venture which cost him his savings.[25] He did not report any current mental health concerns to Mr Cummins, other than being depressed about his legal situation and acknowledging the need to get counselling to deal with his drug addiction.[26] He ruminates about his poor decisions in the past, and a realisation that he has thrown away the opportunities presented to him by his intelligence.
[25]Ibid, [23].
[26]Ibid, [30], [32].
138Mr Cummins thought that Mr Liu would benefit from mental health treatment, although he thought that Mr Liu's presentation in custody was unlikely to trigger such assistance being provided.
Guilty Plea and Remorse
139Mr Liu indicated that he would plead guilty to the charges on the Commonwealth Indictment after the committal at which a serious charge was discharged. The State matters proceeded by way of straight hand-up brief, and the charges resolved after negotiation.
140As with the other two men I am sentencing today, I take into account that the pleas of guilty have facilitated the administration of justice and save the courts and the authorities the trouble and expense of a trial. The lingering effects of the pandemic increase the utilitarian value of the pleas.
141Mr Liu told Mr Cummins that he knew his conduct was wrong, when he was doing it, and he feels anger and self-blame for his drug use and offending.
142His pleas of guilty, in addition to their utilitarian value, are also an acceptance of responsibility. It was submitted on his behalf that Mr Liu was genuinely remorseful for his offending. I accept that he regrets his offending, due to its impact on himself, and his family, and he certainly appears to have a greater level of insight than the other two offenders.
Remand
143As with Mr Liew and Mr Tiong I take into account the effects of the pandemic on the time they have spent on remand.
Criminal History
144Mr Liu has relevant prior court appearances. He was sentenced at Moorabbin Magistrates' Court in November 2019 for trafficking methylamphetamine and dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime. He received a 12 month CCO. He was also sentenced for charges of driving whilst disqualified and possessing methylamphetamine in May 2019 at the same court and also received a CCO.
145He was before the courts for various driving offences in 2008, 2012 and 2013.
Akoka
146Mr Liu was bailed after the State offences. As part of his bail he spent four months at The Cottage, in Shepparton. The program provided by The Cottage required morning check ins, and daily education or exercise sessions, as a group. Throughout the four phases of the program at The Cottage, participants are required to take part in a number of compulsory meetings and sessions. During the first four weeks, contact with friends and family was significantly curtailed, chores had to be done and the participant was not permitted to leave the premises. In phase two, some off-site leave was permitted, and visitors were also permitted. The level of restrictions gradually decreased over the period of the program. I take into account the time Mr Liu spent at The Cottage, in accordance with the authority of Akoka v The Queen.[27]
[27]Akoka v The Queen [2017] VSCA 214.
Prospects of Rehabilitation
147Defence counsel properly acknowledged that Mr Liu's prospects of rehabilitation are linked to his drug addiction and negative associates. His future depends on his ability to grapple with his addiction. The glowing letter from The Cottage speaks of his ability to address his addiction, and that he has the insight and capability to do so. In view of the long-term nature of his addiction, the process of recovery will be difficult and will likely involve relapse and re-applying himself more than once.
148Mr Liu was supported by family at the plea hearing, and letters from friends and family were tendered on the plea. References from a former employer, former landlord and friends all speak well of him. Two friends write of their view that he needs structure and purpose to assist him with getting his life on track. His former employer also writes very positively about him. None of those who provided references for Mr Liu refer to him having a drug addiction, but I cannot come to any conclusion why that is the case.
Section 16BA Offence
149Mr Liu has agreed for an offence to be taken into account pursuant to s16BA of the Commonwealth Crimes Act. This is to be taken into account when I am imposing the sentence on Charge 1 on the Commonwealth indictment. This means that when imposing sentence on that charge, I must give greater weight to specific deterrence, and just punishment. I take into account that the offending conduct for this additional matter was failing to provide the authorities with the information enabling them to access his phone, in breach of a court order. The maximum penalty for that offence is 10 years' imprisonment.
Other Sentencing Principles and Purposes
150The next areas which need to be considered are the gravity of the offending, other sentencing principles which apply to all the offenders, including parity, totality, general deterrence and denunciation. I will deal with each accused in turn under these headings.
Gravity of Offending
151The broad principles applying to the assessment of the gravity of a charge of possessing or attempting to possess a border controlled drug were set out by Maxwell P in 2011, as follows:[28]
[28]Nguyen & Phommalysack v The Queen (2011) 31 VR 673, [34] (footnotes omitted).
The criminality of an offender must be assessed by consideration of the involvement of the offender in the steps taken to effect the importation. Where it is capable of being discerned, the role played by the offender is of great importance in assessing the objective criminality of the offence.
Problems may emerge when a sentencing court attempts to categorise the role of the offender in the drug enterprise, as in many cases the full nature and extent of the enterprise is unlikely to be known to the Court.
It is the criminality involved in the importation which must be identified. The fact that another person may be characterised as the 'mastermind' does not mean that a person who was responsible for managing the importation into Australia is properly described as having only a middle level of responsibility.
Although the weight of the drug imported is not the principal factor to be considered when fixing sentence, the size of the importation is a relevant factor and has increased significance when the offender is aware of the amount of drugs imported.
Ordinarily, the amount of the drug involved in an importation is a highly relevant factor in determining the objective seriousness of the offence, even to the extent of assessing that a particular offence is in the worst category of its type. In many cases, the only factor that would lead to a determination that one importation is worse than another would be the amount of drug involved where otherwise the circumstances of the importation were the same or very similar.
As a matter of common sense, it should be inferred, unless there is evidence to the contrary, that a person who is importing drugs is doing so for profit. (The fact that the offender needs money to pay off a debt does not necessarily affect culpability.)
The difficulty of detecting importation offences, and the great social consequences that follow, suggest that deterrence is to be given chief weight on sentence and that stern punishment will be warranted in almost every case.
The sentence to be imposed for a drug importation offence must signal to would-be drug traffickers that the potential financial rewards to be gained from such activities are neutralised by the risk of severe punishment.
Involvement at any level in a drug importation offence must necessarily attract a significant sentence. Otherwise the interests of general deterrence are not served.
The prior good character of a person involved in a drug importation offence is generally to be given less weight as a mitigating factor than it might otherwise be given.
Where offenders are not young, the immaturity of youth cannot be claimed as a factor bearing upon their transgressions.
Where an offender is to be sentenced for an attempted possession offence, it should be kept in mind that the act of attempted possession can be attended by a wide range of moral culpability, so that the circumstances in which a person so charged attempted to come into possession of the drug, and what it was that the person intended to do with that drug, are relevant to determining the degree of moral culpability attached to the act of attempted possession itself. A sentencing judge should have regard to the offender's involvement in the overall transaction for the purpose of determining the offender's degree of involvement in a drug-smuggling enterprise.
Offences of attempting to possess imported drugs are not, for that reason, in a less serious category than that of importing the drugs.
152In respect to the Commonwealth charges, it is apparent from the videos, images, and discussions between all the accused and their syndicate contact that the syndicate took steps to avoid detection, including rental of properties, use of names other than the accused to rent the property and for the addressee on the consignment, and scanning of the consignment on arrival.
153The images found on Kelvin Tiong and Chris Liew's phones of this consignment, and others being unpacked, as well as images of the weighing of substances, demonstrate the use of videos and images as a method of ensuring that those doing the actual hands on work were not stealing from the syndicate, and carrying out their work properly.
154On the other hand, it is clear that none of these three offenders were at a management level in this syndicate. Each appears to be working at the ground level doing practical tasks and being most exposed to being apprehended.
William Liu
155William Liu is to be sentenced for his conduct of attending the Nottingwood Street house with the radio frequency detector, for the purpose of scanning the consignment. He did so, aware that the consignment was around 30 kilograms, and that it was methamphetamine. His attendance was pre-arranged and in the context of a pre-existing relationship with the syndicate contact. This is shown not only by the messages between Mr Liu and M MMM, but also by the statements of the syndicate contact to Mr Tiong that Mr Liu knew what to do.
156The message from JJ to Chris Liew that 'Worst case scenario I'll say that I couldn't find the machine today' indicates that the syndicate contact thought it highly desirable for the consignment to be scanned and that if Mr Liu failed to show up, this was regrettable but not actually prohibitive of the consignment being opened. Thus, Mr Liu's role in the attempt to take possession of the drug in this consignment was, although limited and discrete, an important one.
157I accept that he was not a major player in the syndicate and that it is most likely that he was to be paid or rewarded for his limited role, rather than profiting in any significant way. In comparison to Mr Chris Liew and Mr Tiong, he was involved on this day for a short time only, and he was not involved prior to this day in preparing the premises for the delivery. Unlike those two men, however, he was aware of the approximate amount of the drug and that it was methamphetamine.
158Mr Liu also pleads guilty to a charge of possession of 4.7 grams (pure) of methamphetamine, and two summary offences. The bail offence is a serious instance of such a charge. Mr Liu was on bail for other serious drug offending, he had spent four months in residential rehabilitation and then returned to his drug taking lifestyle, before attending the Nottingwood Street house at the behest of the syndicate, for reward.
159Regarding the State offending, Mr Liu has pleaded guilty to trafficking Heroin, methylamphetamine, cocaine, Ketamine, MDMA and Cannabis. The most serious offence was Charge 5, trafficking in methylamphetamine in not less than a commercial quantity. The quantity of drug in respect to that charge was 124 grams (pure) or 148.7 grams mixed. At the time, the commercial quantity threshold of pure methylamphetamine was 50 grams and 250 grams if mixed with another substance. Thus, the pure amount was nearly 2.5 times the State commercial quantity threshold, pure, but well under the mixed threshold. The purity of that drug was quite high, being above 80%.
160Even accepting that Mr Liu was addicted to methylamphetamine, his culpability is high. He had in his possession, for the purposes of trafficking, six different drugs of dependence. The quantities were well above low level amounts, although some were packaged into smaller amounts. The range and quantities of drug in his possession were well above that which would be consistent with a low level street dealer.
161As to the summary offences on the State indictment, I consider that the cultivation charge is at the lowest end, as is the driving offence. The s195 charge in respect to the tobacco is significant, covering 63 kilograms in many containers and several locations.
Kelvin Tiong and Chris Liew
162I will deal now with Mr Tiong and Chris Liew. The acts and culpability of each of these men, in respect to the consignment delivered on 4 August 2022 are very similar. Each of them had had previously been involved in the syndicate, as shown by the images on their phones, and the nature of the communications between them and their syndicate contacts, in the days leading up to 4 August. I note also Chris Liew's admissions to involvement in five or six consignments prior to this. Each man was involved in purchasing tools for the deconstruction of the consignment, and the set-up of the house. Whilst documents connected with the lessee of the property were found in Mr Tiong's possession, the prosecution have not alleged that he rented that property on behalf of the syndicate.
163Both arrived at the Nottingwood Street house at around 4 pm, and remained there until they realised a signal was coming from the consignment. They were there to unpack the parcels and remove the drugs.
164Whilst it is not alleged that they knew the drug in the consignment was methamphetamine, nor the precise weight of it, I find, beyond reasonable doubt, that they were aware that there was a very significant quantity of border controlled drug involved. The preparation for the consignment was extensive and the plan to take possession of the contents involved three men on the ground, all of whom would have been expecting to be paid. The extent of the preparation for the consignment, in which they were involved, compels the conclusion that the syndicate stood to make a very significant amount of money from it, and thus that it was a significant quantity of drug. This must have been clear to both Chris Liew and Kelvin Tiong.
165I do not accept the submission made on behalf of Mr Tiong that he was reckless as to the substance being a border controlled drug. That submission was based upon Mr Tiong telling Ms Lechner 'I briefly considered that it might be drugs but gave more attention to the money' and that he did not ask questions.[29] That stands in contrast to the actions he took part in, his possession of the Boyan YAO documents, and the images on his phone of another consignment being deconstructed, people extracting substances, and substances in various resealable bags.
[29]Psychologist Report of Carla Lechner dated 25 May 2023 page 4.
166I can make no finding as to how much any of these accused was going to be paid for their involvement, but I consider the statement by Chris Liew in his interview that he was expecting to be paid $1,000, and a similar statement to Ms Lechner by Mr Tiong, are not credible, given the extent of their activity.
Chris Liew additional charges
167Chris Liew is also charged with a range of other offences, based upon the drugs and items found in his car when it was searched. Charge 3 involved his possession of 1,874.6 grams of pure methamphetamine, which is around 2.5 times the Commonwealth commercial quantity threshold. He had a cutting agent in his possession, and 66.2 grams of pure Ketamine in different bags, one of which weighed around an ounce. The MDMA charge is at a lower scale.
168Furthermore, Chris Liew faces a number of firearms offences, the most serious of which is his possession of a semi-automatic rifle, in the backseat of his car. Whilst unloaded, this weapon was ready to hand and in the context of possession of a range of illicit drugs. The possession of the three imitation firearms is also concerning, given that each closely resembles a real firearm.
General Deterrence, Just Punishment and Denunciation
169The authorities are clear that general deterrence is a significant factor in sentencing for offending which is attractive to potential offenders, in view of the risks versus reward ratio. That applies even in circumstances where the accused are, in effect, paid workers. It is a common occurrence for syndicates to use people such as these men, to carry out the hands-on roles in various stages of the drug trade. It needs to be clear to anyone contemplating assisting in this way that detection by the authorities will lead to significant consequences.
170General deterrence does not outweigh or overwhelm the other factors, but in view of the gravity of the offending in respect to Charge 1 on the Commonwealth indictment and the other high quantity charges, it is a factor in this case that carries significant weight.
171The courts deal on a daily basis with the effects of illicit drugs in our community. The harm drug addiction and the drug trade cause is profound and widespread. The principles of just punishment and denunciation must also be given significant weight in the sentencing exercise.
172Chris Liew committed a range of offences, some of which were very serious indeed. The evidence points to him being established in a criminal milieu and engaging in offending for reward. Community protection has a role in sentencing Mr Liew, but does not add materially to his sentences, in view of the impact of the other sentencing considerations.
173Similarly, William Liu committed two sets of serious drug offences. General deterrence, just punishment and denunciation of his conduct must be given substantial weight in the sentencing discretion.
Parity
174Regarding Charge 1 on the Commonwealth indictment, there are a variety of differences between the accused, which will impact the sentence imposed on each. These include:
a)Chris Liew and Kelvin Tiong were present at the Nottingwood Street house for longer than William Liu, and it appears that they were there intending to unpack the consignment and extract the concealed substance;
b)William Liu was at the property for a short time, to carry out a specific task. It is unclear whether he would have assisted Chris Liew and Kelvin Tiong in unpacking the consignment;
c)All men were present as part of an ongoing relationship with the syndicate;
d)Chris Liew and Mr Tiong had performed various preparatory acts for this consignment, although they are not charged with that conduct;
e)Chris Liew and Mr Tiong did not have the same level of knowledge as William Liu as to the quantity of the border controlled drug, nor which drug it was;
f)Chris Liew was 20, Kelvin Tiong was 24 at the time, whereas Mr William Liu was 37. Youth is a mitigating factor for Chris Liew, which is not available to the other two men;
g)Chris Liew and Mr Tiong had no prior court appearances. William Liu has prior matters for trafficking and possession of methylamphetamine;
h)All three men pleaded guilty, with differences in the timing which are of little significance;
i)In sentencing William Liu on Charge 1, I am to take into account the offence of failing to comply with an order pursuant to s3LA of the Crimes Act 1914.
175The prosecution submission was that, taking account all the various factors, each of Mr Liew, Mr Tiong and Mr William Liu would receive the same or close to the same sentence on Charge 1. I agree with this proposition vis a vis William Liu and Kelvin Tiong, but consider that the sentence imposed on Chris Liew should be a degree lower, due to the impact of his youth on the sentencing discretion.
Totality
176When imposing sentence for multiple charges it is necessary to consider orders for cumulation or concurrency that will result in a sentence which captures the totality of the offending, but no more. I am mindful of the additional impact a lengthy term of imprisonment would have on Chris Liew in view of his youth.
177It was submitted on behalf of William Liu that there should be substantial concurrency between the offending in 2021 and 2022. I was told that s16(3C) of the Sentencing Act 1991 did not apply to the subsequent Commonwealth offending.
178Whilst I accept that the principle of totality will lead to there being a degree of concurrency between the two sets of offending committed by William Liu, I do not accept that it calls for 'substantial concurrency' as submitted by defence counsel. Both sets of offending involve serious[30] drug offending. The 2022 offending occurred after William Liu had served some two months on remand, and spent a further four months in a residential drug-rehabilitation facility. Whilst I accept that lapses on the road to recovery are common, William Liu's subsequent offending was significant. The separate groups of serious offending call for cumulation reflecting the combined gravity of the offending.
[30]Used as a descriptor not a definition.
Comparable Cases
179Sentences imposed in other cases have been of assistance to me in reaching a conclusion as to the sentences to be imposed on each of these offenders. I was referred to a number of cases by the prosecution, and to the cases summarised at the end of the judgment of DPP v Brown [2017] VSCA 162. For the most part, the roles of each of these men whom I am to sentence were less than those noted in the comparable cases, and the quantities of border controlled drug are also a point of difference. Counsel for Mr Tiong submitted that case of Peng[31] was the most useful comparator for his client. Mr Peng had been involved in the importation of 30.8 times the commercial quantity of methylamphetamine. He made enquiries about the shipment and took delivery of it before unpacking it and arranging for delivery to another person. He received a sentence after a Crown appeal of 13 years.
[31]DPP (Cth) v Peng [2014] VSCA 12.
180I have had regard to that case, and to the others set out in the chart provided by the prosecution and the cases summarised at the end of DPP v Brown. I have also reviewed the Judicial College case summaries in respect to charges of commercial quantity, trafficking as a State charge and I will include the cases which I found of most significance in a footnote.[32]
[32]Mourkakos v R[2018] VSCA 26; Parks v R[2017] VSCA 232; Fernando v R[2017] VSCA 208.
Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Section 17A
181It is conceded by all the accused in their respective cases that the only appropriate outcome is a gaol term with a non-parole period. This is clear in light of the seriousness of the offending, and taking into account the personal circumstances of each accused.
182The next matter I will address is the forfeiture orders. The State Director seeks forfeiture from William Liu of the drugs and paraphernalia seized. This order was not opposed and I will make it. The Commonwealth seeks forfeiture of a range of items from each accused man. Some of these items were those to which I have referred in my reasons, others are not. I have considered the nature of the items forfeited, that they are not of high value and the joint position of the prosecution and defence counsel, that the consent to the forfeiture of these items will not materially affect the sentences to be imposed.
Chris Liew
183The sentences for Chris Liew are:
· Charge 1, attempting to possess a commercial quantity of an unlawfully imported border controlled drug, being methylamphetamine, the sentence is nine years.
· Charge 2, possession of an unregistered category C or category D longarm, being a semiautomatic rifle, the sentence is one year and six months.
· Charge 3, possession of a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug, methylamphetamine, reasonably suspected of having been unlawfully imported, the sentence is four years.
· Charge 4, possession of Ketamine, the sentence is one year.
· Charge 5, possession of MDMA, the sentence is one month.
184Summary Charge 2, driving as a learner driver without an appropriate supervising driver, the sentence is one month. S
· Summary Charge 3, which is drive as a learner driver without displaying L plates on the front, a fine of $150.
· Summary Charge 4, drive as a learner driver without displaying L plates at the rear of the vehicle, fine of $150.
· Summary Charge 6, possession of a prohibited weapon, being knuckledusters, a sentence of two months.
· Summary Charge 10, possession of an imitation firearm, six months.
· Summary Charge 11, possession of an imitation firearm, being the Airsoft handgun, six months.
· Summary Charge 12, possession of an imitation firearm, being the Laser black longarm, is six months' imprisonment as well.
185NOTE: what follows in italics are the orders as read out in court. Following court adjourning various errors were identified in the orders. The final orders made were varied to achieve the intended total effective sentences and non-parole periods and to rectify some mistakes made in reading out the orders in Court.
186The sentences on Charges 4 and 5
187Indictment Charges 4 and commence six months after the commencement of the State sentences, which by law, commence today. The sentence on indictable Charge 3 commences six months after the commencement of the sentence on indictable Charge 4 and the sentence on Charge 1 on the indictment commences 12 months after the commencement of the sentence on Charge 3, being the indictable Charge 3.
188By my calculations, these orders lead to a total effective sentence of 11 years' imprisonment, with a non-parole period of eight years.
189I declare 501 days of presentence detention and pursuant to s6AAA, I state that if Mr Chris Liew had not pleaded guilty, I would have sentenced him to 14 years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 11 years.
190I am going to give everyone a chance to check all the orders once we have stood down and we will deal with that later.
191MR SALA: Sorry, before Your Honour moves on, I apprehend that, in relation to summary offences, Charge 2, 10, 11 and 12, they all run concurrent.
192HER HONOUR: They all run concurrently from today.
193MR SALA: Thank you, Your Honour.
194HER HONOUR: William Liu. On the State indictment the sentences are:
· Charge 1, trafficking heroin, sentence is one year.
· Charge 2, trafficking Ketamine, one year imprisonment.
· Charge 3, trafficking MDMA, the sentence is nine months' imprisonment.
· Charge 4, trafficking cocaine, sentence of one year.
· Charge 5, trafficking methamphetamine not less than a commercial quantity, the sentence is four years and six months' imprisonment.
· Charge 6, trafficking cannabis, one year, six months.
· Charge 7, cultivating cannabis, the charge is proved and there is no other order.
· Summary Charge 10, which is the s195 charge regarding the 63 kilograms of tobacco, the sentence is one year imprisonment.
· Summary Charge 11, which is running the red light, a fine of $100.
· Summary Charge 12, committing indictable offence on bail, a sentence of one month.
195On the State indictment, the sentence of four years and six months on Charge 5 is the base. One month of Charge 1, one month of Charge 2, one month of Charge 3 and one month of Charge 4 sentences are to be served cumulatively on each other and on the base sentence. Six months of the sentence on Charge 6 and three months of the sentence on summary Charge 10 are also to be served cumulatively upon each other and upon the other orders for cumulation and the base.
196By my calculations, that leads to a total effective sentence on the State indictment of five years and seven months' imprisonment. On that indictment, I set a non-parole period of four years and I declare 63 days of presentence detention.
197On the Commonwealth indictment:
· Charge 1, attempting to possess a commercial quantity of an unlawfully imported border controlled drug, the sentence is 10 years' imprisonment.
· Charge 6 on the Commonwealth incitement, possession of methamphetamine, the sentence is nine months' imprisonment.
· Summary Charge 2, committing an indictable offence whilst on bail, the sentence is two months' imprisonment and
· Summary Charge 3, driving while suspended, the sentence is two months' imprisonment.
198The sentence on Charge 6 commences 40 months before the end of the sentences imposed in proceeding CR-21-02643, that is the State indictment. The sentence on Charge 1 commences 37 months before the end of the sentences imposed in proceeding CR-21-02643.
199By my calculations, that leads to a total Commonwealth sentence - sorry, on the Commonwealth indictment and in taking into account the summary charges in the Commonwealth proceeding, that leads to a total effective sentence of 10 years and three months.
200I declare 501 days presentence detention.
201By my calculations, the order of concurrency between the two proceedings leads to a total effective sentence of 13 years and six months. I set a new overall non-parole period across both matters of 10 years and six months
202I declare, pursuant to s6AAA, that if Mr William Liu had not pleaded guilty, he would have received a sentence of 17 years, with a non-parole period of 14 years.
203In respect to Kelvin Tiong:
· Charge 1, attempting to possess a commercial quantity of an unlawfully imported border controlled drug, being methylamphetamine, he is sentenced to 10 years' imprisonment.
· Summary Charge 2, driving as a learner driver without an appropriate supervising driver, the sentence is one month.
· Summary Charge 3, driving as a learner driver without the L plates displayed on the front of the vehicle, a fine of $150.
· Summary Charge 4, driving as a learner driver without displaying L plates on the rear of the vehicle, a fine of $150.
204Both Commonwealth sentences commence today. That means there is a total effective sentence of 10 years' imprisonment. I set a non-parole period of seven years and six months. The fines imposed on Mr Tiong amount to $300.
205I declare 501 days of presentence detention and I state pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act that if Kelvin Tiong had not pleaded guilty, I would have imposed a sentence of 13 years, with a non-parole period of 10 years.
206Now, does everyone want some time to just go through those orders? Do you want me to read them out again? Have you received the email yet?
207MR KEKS: Not yet, Your Honour. Can I ask, I am sorry, I am sure I missed it
208HER HONOUR: No
209MR KEKS: in respect of Mr Tiong, did Your Honour announce a non-parole period?
210HER HONOUR: Yes, seven years and six months.
211MR KEKS: Thank you and I will say this, Your Honour. No doubt we'll need some time to have a look at this. I can say that the cumulation commencement dates and so on in respect of a total effective sentence on first flush to me look without error, if I may say so with respect, but I can
212HER HONOUR: But just take - everyone will need some time, except for Mr Tiong, who's very straightforward.
213MR KEKS: I can tell Your Honour now there will be an issue. I just need to determine exactly what I'll say about it
214HER HONOUR: All right.
215MR KEKS: but the non-parole period
216HER HONOUR: Yes.
217MR KEKS: must be and this only relates to Mr Liew and Mr Liu
218HER HONOUR: Yes.
219MR KEKS: Your Honour must, or cannot impose a single non-parole period that attaches to both Commonwealth and State sentences. In other words, the non-parole period overall for those two would be the Commonwealth non-parole period and so and I'll solidify what I'm going to say about this, but for example, I suspect that the answer will be for Mr Liew, Your Honour's announced a total effective sentence of 11 years, with a non-parole period of eight years. Given that the Commonwealth sentence starts in two years, I suspect that the formal order will be a non-parole period should be fixed on the Commonwealth sentences of six years, the intention being
220HER HONOUR: I'll tell you what I'm going to do. I'm going to stand down
221MR KEKS: All right.
222HER HONOUR: and you can discuss the orders with the respective people and I think everyone understands what my intention is. Sometimes getting there is trickier than I thought it might be. I'm going to let you all discuss it and perhaps if you can come to an agreed position that works, achieves the effect that I'm trying to with these orders, email my chambers. If it needs to be discussed further, I have another matter at 10.30.
223MR KEKS: I'm confident that it can be dealt with well in advance of that, Your Honour.
224HER HONOUR: We'll figure it out. If we need to come back and have further argument about it, it'll have to be probably after 12 o'clock today, because of the other matter that I've got, but hopefully it can just be done and done administratively and I can change the orders administratively to achieve the effect that I was trying to achieve. Have you got the reasons now?
225MR SALA: Yes Your Honour.
226MR CESCATO: I've received the email, Your Honour.
227HER HONOUR: Yes. You're in a less tricky position, Mr Cescato, so you can go and have a nice cup of coffee, but what I will do now is, I will stand down. Each of you will probably want to have a quick chat to your respective clients and confirm with them what the effect of my orders are and work out the details of it and communicate with my chambers if there's any issues.
228MR MALIK: So I take Your Honour's not intending on coming back onto the Bench?
229HER HONOUR: No
230MR MALIK: Thank you.
231HER HONOUR: and not unless anyone wants me to.
232MR MALIK: No. If Your Honour does, if I might be excused?
233HER HONOUR: Yes Mr Malik.
234MR MALIK: I just have another matter at 10.
235HER HONOUR: Yes, I'll let you go now.
236MR MALIK: Thank you.
237HER HONOUR: I'll stand down now. I won't reconvene in this matter unless I'm asked to do so. All the details of getting the wording right, in the order to achieve the intended effect, can be done via correspondence. You want to say something, Mr Chipkin?
238MR CHIPKIN: Yes Your Honour. Just before Your Honour adjourns, Charge 9, I believe, on the State matter, was to be remitted to the Magistrates' Court. Can I just confirm
239HER HONOUR: That was done on the last occasion.
240MR CHIPKIN: That was done on the last occasion, thank you, Your Honour.
241HER HONOUR: That was done on the last orders, yes.
242MR KEKS: I'll just say this, Your Honour. Unfortunately I'm travelling after 10.30, so I won't be available if we need to come back and I do seek to be excused, if that's necessary, but I'm sure my instructor will be
243HER HONOUR: Yes, I don't think we'll need to come back.
244MR KEKS: Yes, I hope that's
245HER HONOUR: I think that it can just be done by correspondence.
246MR KEKS: Thank you, Your Honour.
247MR CESCATO: I would also seek to be excused, if we had to reconvene.
248HER HONOUR: Yes Mr Cescato. No problem.
249MR CESCATO: Thank you, Your Honour.
250HER HONOUR: All right, thank you everyone for your assistance. I will stand down. We'll leave the links open, so people can have brief chats and thank you, this matter is now concluded.
251What follows are the final orders made in respect to William Liu on the Commonwealth Indictment, and in respect to Chris Liew.
William Liu on the Commonwealth Indictment
252Charge) 1 Convicted and sentenced to 10 year/s imprisonment.
253Direct that the sentence on Charge 1 commences 3 years 6 months after the commencement of the sentences imposed in proceeding CR-21-02643.
254Charge 6 Convicted and sentenced to 9 month/s imprisonment.
255Direct that the sentence on Charge 6 commences 3 years 3 months after the commencement of the sentences imposed in proceeding CR-21-02643.
256Summary Charge 2 Convicted and sentenced to 2 month/s imprisonment.
257Summary Charge 3 Convicted and sentenced to 2 month/s imprisonment.
258Further declare the period that the prisoner has been in custody in respect of these offences namely 501 day/s, be reckoned as a period of imprisonment already served under this sentence, which is to be deducted administratively.
259Direct that the minimum term to be served before being eligible for parole on the commonwealth offences is 7 years 3 months imprisonment.
260Direct that the minimum term to be served before being eligible for parole commences when the sentence on charge 6 commences.
261Total Effective Sentence for the Commonwealth indictment is 10 years 6 months imprisonment.
262Total Effective Global Sentence (State and Commonwealth) is 13 years 6 months imprisonment with a total non-parole period of 10 years 6 months.
Chris Liu on the Commonwealth Indictment
263Charge 1 Convicted and sentenced to 9 year/s imprisonment.
264Direct the sentence on Charge 1 commences 12 months after the commencement of the sentence on Charge 3.
265Charge 3 Convicted and sentenced to 4 year/s imprisonment.
266Direct that the sentence on Charge 3 commence 6 months after the commencement of the sentence on Charge 4.
267Charge 4 Convicted and sentenced to 1 year/s imprisonment.
268Charge 5 Convicted and sentenced to 1 month/s imprisonment.
269Direct that the sentences on Charges 4 and 5 commence 6 months after the commencement of the State sentences.
270Direct that the prisoner is to serve a minimum of 7 year/s 6 month/s before being eligible for parole.
271Charge 2 Convicted and sentenced to 18 month/s imprisonment.
272Summary Charge 2 Convicted and sentenced to 1 month/s imprisonment.
273Summary Charge 6 Convicted and sentenced to 2 month/s imprisonment.
274Summary Charge 10 Convicted and sentenced to 6 month/s imprisonment.
275Summary Charge 11 Convicted and sentenced to 6 month/s imprisonment.
276Summary Charge 12 Convicted and sentenced to 6 month/s imprisonment.
277Direct that 1 month of the sentence imposed on summary charge 10, 1 month of the sentence imposed on summary charge 11, 1 month/s of the sentence imposed on summary charge 12 be served cumulatively upon each other and upon the sentence imposed upon charge 2.
278Further declare the period that the prisoner has been in custody in respect of these offences namely 501 days, be reckoned as a period of imprisonment already served under this sentence, which is to be deducted administratively.
279Direct that the minimum term to be served before being eligible for parole on the state offences is 12 months’ imprisonment.
280Direct that the minimum term to be served before being eligible for parole on the commonwealth offences is 7 years 6 months’ imprisonment commencing when the sentence on Charges 4 and 5 commence.
281Direct that the overall minimum term to be served before being eligible for parole is 8 years imprisonment commencing at the commencement of the state sentences imposed this day.
282Total Effective Sentence (State) is 1 year 9 months’ imprisonment.
283Total Effective Global Sentence (State and Federal) is 11 years’ imprisonment.
284Summary Charge 3, 4 On each charge convicted and order that CHRIS LIEW pay a fine in the sum of $150.00.
9
0