Chung v The King - [2025] NSWCCA 87

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: Chung v R [2025] NSWCCA 87
Hearing dates: 4 December 2024
Decision date: 06 June 2025
Before: Stern JA at [1];
Fagan J at [4];
Ierace J at [5]
Decision:
(1)   Appeal allowed.
(2)   The sentence imposed on the applicant on 24 November 2023 is quashed.
(3)   The applicant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 4 years and 6 months, backdated to commence on 23 February 2023 and to expire on 22 August 2027, with a non-parole period of 3 years and 2 months, to expire on 22 April 2026.

Catchwords:
CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against sentence — Where applicant convicted of supply a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine —Whether sentencing judge erred in assessing the seriousness of the applicant’s conduct — Whether assumptions about criminal organisations unrelated to the offence in question were made — Whether a denial of procedural fairness
CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against sentence — Where applicant convicted of supply a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine — Prospects of rehabilitation — Whether sentencing judge failed to take into account that applicant had good prospects of rehabilitation — Resentencing exercise

Legislation Cited:
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A(b), 3A(d), 5(1), 7(1), 21A, 21A(2), 21(3) 21A(3)(g), 21A(3)(h), 21A(3)(e), 21A(3)(f), 25D(2)(a), 54A(1)
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(c)
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), ss 25(2), 33(3)(a), Sch 1

Cases Cited:
Baker v R (2022) 302 A Crim R 60; [2022] NSWCCA 195
Chiarlini v R [2023] NSWCCA 227
DH v R [2022] NSWCCA 200
Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37
Li v R [2023] NSWCCA 112
Meoli v R [2021] NSWCCA 21
Nguyen v R [2024] NSWCCA 178
Zuffo v R [2017] NSWCCA 187

Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Wai Sze Chung (Applicant)
Rex (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
Mr T Woods (Applicant)
Mr J Styles (Respondent)
Solicitors:
XD Law (Applicant)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (NSW) (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2022/00276584
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court

Date of Decision:

24 November 2023

Before:

King SC DCJ

File Number(s):

2022/00276584

HEADNOTE

[This headnote is not to be read as part of the judgment]

On 24 November 2023, Ms Wai Sze Chung (the applicant) was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 6 years and 9 months, to commence on 23 February 2023 and expire on 22 November 2029, with a non-parole period of 5 years, expiring on 22 February 2028, following her plea of guilty to an offence of supplying a large commercial quantity of a prohibited drug (998.3g of methylamphetamine) contrary to s 25(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). The applicant sought leave to appeal the sentence pursuant to s 5(1)(c) of the Criminal Appel Act 1912 (NSW), ultimately relying upon three of five initial grounds of appeal. They were:

The sentencing Judge erred in assessing the seriousness of the applicant’s conduct in that his Honour:

Grounds of appeal

[14] The appellant contends that the primary judge erred in finding that the respondent had discharged the onus of establishing the matters required under the relevant provision.

[15] It was submitted that his Honour failed to give adequate weight to the evidence of the second witness, and that the findings of fact were not reasonably open on the material before the Court.

[16] The respondent, for its part, submits that no error is disclosed, and that the conclusions reached were well within the range of outcomes available to the primary judge.

Consideration

[17] It is convenient to deal first with the question of construction, as the resolution of that issue informs the remaining grounds advanced by the appellant.

[18] For the reasons that follow, we are of the view that the appeal should be allowed in part and the matter remitted for further determination.

Continue reading Chung v The King

Details

AGLC: Chung v The King [2025] NSWCCA 87
Case: [2025] NSWCCA 87
Decision Date: 06 June 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In Chung v The King, the applicant, Chung, appealed against his sentence imposed by the sentencing judge for the supply of a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia, which heard the appeal from the original conviction and sentence handed down by a lower court. The primary issue before the court was whether the sentencing judge had erred in assessing the seriousness of the applicant's conduct, and whether assumptions about criminal organisations unrelated to the offence in question were made, thereby denying procedural fairness. The court also considered whether the sentencing judge had failed to take into account that the applicant had good prospects of rehabilitation.

The court found that the sentencing judge did not err in assessing the seriousness of the applicant's conduct, noting that the supply of a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine was indeed a serious offence. However, the court did find that the sentencing judge had made assumptions about criminal organisations unrelated to the offence in question, which amounted to a denial of procedural fairness. The court further found that the sentencing judge had failed to take into account that the applicant had good prospects of rehabilitation, which was an important factor in the sentencing exercise.

The court, therefore, allowed the appeal and ordered a resentencing exercise to be conducted, taking into account the correct factors and without making assumptions about unrelated criminal organisations. The court emphasised the importance of a fair and balanced sentencing process, which takes into account all relevant factors, including the prospects of rehabilitation of the offender. The High Court's decision in Chung v The King serves as an important reminder to sentencing judges of the need to adhere to proper legal principles and to avoid making assumptions that may prejudice the fairness of the sentencing process.

Orders