Director of Public Prosecutions v Chuong

[2025] VCC 169

IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA

Revised

Not Restricted

Suitable for Publication

AT LATROBE VALLEY

CRIMINAL JURISDICTION

CR-24-00522

DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS

v

BUI CHUONG

---

JUDGE:	HIS HONOUR JUDGE CHETTLE
WHERE HELD:	Latrobe Valley
DATE OF HEARING:	21 February 2025
DATE OF SENTENCE:	21 February 2025
CASE MAY BE CITED AS:	DPP v Chuong
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION:	[2025] VCC 169

REASONS FOR SENTENCE

---

Subject:CRIMINAL LAW - SENTENCE

Catchwords:              Cultivation of narcotic plant, commercial quantity - plea of guilty

Legislation Cited:      Sentencing Act 1991

Cases Cited:

Sentence:                  Imprisonment, Total effective sentence of xx Non-parole period 1 year and 6 months, Forfeiture and Disposal Orders

---

APPEARANCES:	Counsel	Solicitors
For the Director of Public Prosecutions	Mr A. Grant	Office of Public Prosecutions, Ms I. Anticev
For the Accused	Mr L. Hocking	Ms B Nowak, VLA Morwell

HIS HONOUR:

1Bui Kori Chuong, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of cultivation of a narcotic plant in a quantity not less than a commercial quantity.

2The facts of your offending are set out in Exhibit A, the prosecution opening.  Your counsel informed me that I could treat that document as an agreed statement of fact.  I incorporate it into these reasons for sentence.  And I sentence you on the basis of the facts set out therein.

3But very, very briefly stated.  On 12 October 2023 police executed a search warrant at 5 Devon Court, Morwell and found a house full of cannabis plants, electrical wiring and sophisticated components used to cultivate cannabis with a hydroponic scheme operating throughout the house.  In total 426 plants were located, but they were of various sizes.  Some very small and three bags of loose cannabis in a number of tubs were located.  The total weight of the cannabis located was 32.32 kilograms, which is above the 25 kilogram commercial quantity stipulated by parliament.

4You were interviewed and made limited cooperation with police.  Provided them access to your phone, made admissions to being a crop sitter, effectively watering the plants in return for expected financial gain.

5Your personal circumstances are set out in Exhibit 1, the outline of submissions by the defence.  You are currently 59 years of age, approaching your 60th birthday in July this year.  You were born in Vietnam and grew up in Hanoi.  You educated to Year 12 level.  You had some work as a chauffeur for some 30 years and you have also worked intermittently in the construction industry.  You have been married twice and you currently have two children, one from your first marriage and one from your second, who are being looked after by your wife who is an accountant.  You have been working in Australia as an itinerate fruit picker on a student visa sending money back to Vietnam to support your family and that was clearly what you planned to do from the proceeds of the cannabis crop you were assisting the cultivation of.

6There are a number of factors that I take into account in sentencing you.  Firstly, your plea of guilty.  Although it was not made at the earliest of opportunity, it is still a relatively early plea and entitled you to a significant reduction to the sentence I would otherwise impose to reflect that plea of guilty, saved the community the time and expense of a criminal trial and it has significant utilitarian benefit in that regard.  It also evidences your acceptance of responsibility and some remorse on your behalf.

7I take into account the fact that you did cooperate in a limited way with the police.  You were reluctant to provide details about those who employed you, but I can understand why that may well be the case.  You are a man with no prior convictions, of previous good character at the age of nearly 60 and I take that into account in your favour.

8You have been on remand since your arrest and your time in custody for you is and will continue to be more onerous than others because you do not speak English.  You will be isolated to some extent in prison.  Your age and the injuries that you have sustained through effectively getting older, will make your time also more onerous for you.

9I think your prospects of rehabilitation are reasonably.  You have a good work history.  And you have no prior convictions.  That is somewhat artificial in this case because in all probabilities you will be deported and sent back to Vietnam.  The fact that that is likely to happen will cause you some stress whilst you are in custody and make your time in custody more onerous for you.  It is not of great significance given that your wife and children are in Vietnam and you will be returning to them once you finish your gaol term. 

10The offence to which you have pleaded guilty is a category 2 offence, pursuant to the Sentencing Act[1] and as such unless you establish one of the exceptions which are rare, set out in the Act the court is obliged to impose a term of imprisonment with a head sentence and a minimum.  And your counsel,

[1]Sentencing Act 1991

Mr Hocking properly conceded that there is no basis for any of the exceptions and the court is bound to sentence you accordingly.

11I have had regard to a number of cases and precedents that the prosecution provided and it is fair to say that each case really depends on its own circumstances.  Every case is different.  In your case I have reached the conclusion that it is a effectively standard run-of-the-mill cultivate in commercial quantity case.  It is not the largest quantity of plants that have been seen by these courts and it is not the smallest, it is middle ground.  Your role is that of a sitter or crop grower.  There is no evidence you are the owner and have nay any financial interest in the crop other than being paid to cultivate it.  You are at no connection to the premises.  You are not the organiser or the principal, but nonetheless as Mr Grant points out you perform a vital role in these schemes by standing between the authorities, the police and those who set up these commercial cannabis enterprises.

12Having regard to all factors set out in the submissions tendered, on the one charge of cultivation of a narcotic plant in a commercial quantity, you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for two years and three months.

13I order that you serve one year and six months of that sentence before being eligible for parole. I make the disposal orders sought by the prosecution and forfeiture orders and ancillary orders requested. And I indicated pursuant to s6AAA of the Sentencing Act 1991[2] that but for your plea of guilty I would have imposed a term of imprisonment of four years with a non-parole period of three.  Are there any other orders required Mr Grant?

[2]Sentencing Act 1991

14MR GRANT:  Just the pre-sentence detention I believe.

15HIS HONOUR:  I declare, yes, that's very important.  I declare that; what was the figure again, 492?

16MR HOCKING:  It's 498 Your Honour.

17HIS HONOUR:  I declare that 498 days of the sentence I have just imposed has already been served by way of pre-sentence detention. 

- - -