Director of Public Prosecutions v Ong
[2024] VCC 1262
•16 August 2024
ection
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised Not Restricted Suitable for Publication |
Case No: CR-24-00110
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| SOO LING ONG |
---
CWJUDGE: | HER HONOUR JUDGE GWYNN | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 21 May 2024, 3 July 2024, 14 August 2024 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 16 August 2024 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | DPP v Ong | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2024] VCC 1262 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:Criminal law
Catchwords: Trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence; trafficking in a drug of dependence
Legislation Cited: Sentencing Act 1991 (Vic); Crimes Act 1958 (Vic)
Cases Cited:Kada v The Queen [2017] VSCA 339; R v McKee [2003] VSCA 18; Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37; R v Verdins & Ors [2007] VSCA 102; Sahhitanandan v The Queen [2019] VSCA 115; Gregory v The Queen [2017] VSCA 151
Sentence: Term of imprisonment of seven years and four months, with a non-parole period of four years and 6 months.
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Mr S. Tamburro | Director of Public Prosecutions |
| For the Offender | Mr S. Ranjit | Emma Turnbull Lawyers |
HER HONOUR:
1Soo Ling Ong, you have pleaded guilty on indictment to charges of trafficking in a drug of dependence, diacetylmorphine (heroin), in not less than a commercial quantity and two charges of trafficking in a drug of dependence, namely, methylamphetamine and cocaine.
2In sentencing you for your crimes, I am obliged to consider the maximum penalties for each of the offences which you have committed. The maximum penalty for trafficking in a drug of dependence in not less than a commercial quantity is 25 years' imprisonment and for trafficking simpliciter is 15 years' imprisonment. These maximum penalties reflect the seriousness with which Parliament regards each offence.
3In addition, the charge of trafficking in a drug of dependence in not less than a commercial quantity is a Category 1 offence within the meaning of the Sentencing Act 1991 and therefore pursuant to s 5(2H) of that Act, I am required to impose a sentence under Division 2 of Part 3 of that Act, involving a period of imprisonment or detention, which cannot be in combination with a Community Correction Order unless a relevant exception applies. You do not seek to rely on any exception.
4The circumstances of your offending were set out in a document entitled 'Summary of Prosecution Opening for Plea' dated 1 March 2024. This is an agreed document and represents your acceptance of the elements of the offences to which you have pleaded guilty as well as the factual basis on which I am to sentence. I will not repeat those facts in full but have had recourse to the entire document.
The offending
5From 14 February 2023 until 12 May 2023, you participated in transactions for the sale of various drugs of dependence to undercover police operatives from two separate addresses which were under Police surveillance. Those addresses were 5 Monica Court and 1172 Plenty Road in Bundoora. On 12 May 2023, you were also in possession of drugs for the purposes of sale.
6You had two co-accused whose charges are yet to be determined.
7Each transaction between you and the undercover operatives are outlined in the Crown Opening.
8There were also telephone intercepts.
9It was on 12 May 2023 that search warrants were executed at each of the two properties.
10At 5 Monica Court, Police located various items detailed in the Crown Opening and which included zip lock bags with white powder, zip lock bags of a white crystal substance, $16,674.90 in cash, a cash counter, various mobile phones, personal documents in your name, and a diary detailing drug transactions. You were located at this property. The contents of the zip lock bags were subsequently identified as methylamphetamine at various, yet high, purity amounts and weighing a total of 17.5 grams.
11Whilst Police were in attendance at Monica Court, a co-accused was seen to throw two plastic bags onto the roof of 6 Cherrywood Court, Bundoora. The content of these bags were subsequently identified as heroin of some 72-73 percent purity and weighing 698.1 grams.
12At 1172 Plenty Road, Police located various items detailed in the Crown Opening and which included three Malaysian passports in your name, 18 sealed bags in various locations containing a white crystal substance, a notebook containing details of drug transactions and various mobile phones. No one was present at this address at the time of the Police attendance. Subsequent analysis identified 5.15 grams of heroin and 61.8 grams of methylamphetamine as being located by Police at the Plenty Road address.
13A Honda HR-V vehicle was located by Police at the Plenty Road premises and was also the subject of search. Amongst other items Police located multiple sealed bags with powder inside, a zip lock bag containing a pink crystalline substance, a zip lock bag containing a crystal substance and a photograph of you and your daughter. Subsequent analysis identified 62.6 grams of methylamphetamine and 121.4 grams of cocaine as being located by Police at the Plenty Road address
14Between 14 February 2023 and 12 May 2023, you trafficked over 824 grams of heroin comprising of 10 transactions to Police. These transactions started with 0.2 grams on 14 February 2023 and finished with 28 grams on 12 May 2023, in addition to the 698.1 grams of heroin located inside the two plastic bags thrown onto the roof of 6 Cherrywood Court on 12 May 2023 (which were clearly for the purposes of sale) and 5.15 grams seized at 1172 Plenty Road.
15Between 12 March 2023 and 12 May 2023, you trafficked a relatively small amount of methylamphetamine to covert operatives but additional amounts for the purposes of sale were located at the two Bundoora properties and in the Honda vehicle, totalling some 144.8 grams of methylamphetamine. The charge of trafficking in cocaine relates to the 121.4 grams of cocaine located in various bags inside the Honda vehicle on 12 May 2023 in the context of an offer for sale on 5 April 2023.
16A commercial quantity of diacetylmorphine is 250 grams mixed and 50 grams pure. A traffickable quantity of methylamphetamine and cocaine is 3 grams of each mixed.
17On arrest and interview by Police, you made no admissions but did advise that you used “ice”, with the amount you used depending on the day.
Gravity of offending and victim impact
18In terms of the offence gravity, this is obviously serious offending.
19In the circumstances of your case, and under a quantity-based sentencing regime, the quantity of drugs is a significant indicator of the seriousness of a drug offence. As perhaps partly outlined:
(a) A large commercial quantity for heroin is 750 grams mixed. Charge 1 comprises 824.9 grams of heroin mixed, which exceeds a large commercial quantity of that drug and is 3.29 times a commercial quantity. There were 601.12 grams of pure heroin, which is 12 times a commercial quantity of that drug, that amount being included in the 824.9 grams.
(b) Charge 2 comprises 144.8 grams of methylamphetamine mixed and slightly over 114 grams of pure methylamphetamine, which comprises over two times a commercial quantity and 48.26 times a traffickable quantity.
(c) Charge 3 comprises 121.4 grams of cocaine mixed, which equated with 95.98 grams pure. You had 40.46 times a traffickable quantity.
20You will only be punished for the offences with which you are charged but the amounts you trafficked or had in possession for the purposes of sale elevates the seriousness of each charge and reflect high moral culpability. Some cumulation between the charges is warranted given the differing drugs and slightly different circumstance of each separate charge.
21During the Police operation, you were the primary contact point as supported by providing your phone number to the operatives, providing the required drugs on request in a responsive time frame and with increasing quantity, negotiating prices and providing quotes on request, guaranteeing quality and, with one exception, it was you which conducted each transaction with the undercover operatives.
22You were able to offer differing types of heroin and methylamphetamine. In addition, the drugs for which you take responsibility were each of high purity. You had told Covert Operative 331 that you did not cut the drugs and anyone that did was stupid. You were paid a total of $52,450 for approximately 122 grams of heroin over the 10 transactions to the undercover operatives. Based on prices you quoted to those operatives, the value to you of the substances seized by Police on 12 May 2023 was approximately $280,000 worth of heroin, $22,500 of methylamphetamine and $42,000 worth of cocaine.
23Whist I could not form the view that you were at the top of any hierarchy and being aware that there are two alleged co-accused, the accepted Police case also had you either conducting or arranging for the movement of drugs between the two premises. Your role was described as 'managerial'. You were clearly part of an organised group where your role was to undertake central tasks to achieve the relevant criminal purpose.
24It was for your own needs that you were prepared to be involved in the pernicious trade of drug trafficking in three separate drugs and, in the case of heroin and methylamphetamine, did so over a number of months. It is a lucrative business with enormous negative and devastating impact on the community through the offending that results from drug addiction, the physical and mental health impacts and the behaviours drugs then produce. You would have to be aware of this from your own experience as a user of methylamphetamine at the time. Whilst contended your offending was to support your own use, I accept that this provides only part of the explanation and, given the dealings made known to me, there simply must have been a financial incentive.
25General deterrence and denunciation are paramount sentencing principles as is the need to consider the protection of the community.
26Your Counsel contends that, by way of mitigation, I should take into account that you were entrapped by Police into providing increasing amounts of drugs. It is argued that you exchanged small quantities for money at the residence and, at times, had to call someone else to facilitate certain transactions. It was submitted that it was the covert operatives who gradually increased the amounts of drugs which were sought.
27I have had regard to the decision in Kada v The Queen [2017] VSCA 339 (‘Kada’),
28Relevant to the consideration raised on your behalf is how the involvement of the Police bears upon your moral culpability including the manner and extent by which Police contributed to the commission of the offending.
29On the materials before me, the trafficking business in which you were involved was in existence at the time of the Police approach. I accept that the Police operatives initially made a small purchase and then sought to increase the amount of heroin sought and then enquired about methylamphetamine. As referred to earlier, the first transaction with the undercover operatives was on 14 February for 0.2 grams. You were able to provide 3.5 grams on request by 17 March 2023 and 28 grams by 3 April 2023. The descriptions of your contacts with the covert operatives had the air of each party getting to know the other and to gain confidence in the transactional relationship. You showed little or no hesitation in meeting the enquiries or requests made to you and of you.
30You displayed knowledge of your product, pricing and accessibility. On 21 April 2023, you were able to explain to the covert operatives that price would decrease as quantities increased. You agreed to communicate on an encrypted service, ‘Signal’. On the same day, you told Covert Operative 331 that everything is done by you so that you could guarantee quality and quantity. You advised that you were always at home to sell. The search conducted by Police on 12 May 2023 revealed significant quantities of drugs in different locations which could not be solely related to your dealings with the operatives. It was never alleged that the covert operatives sought to buy cocaine yet 121.4 grams were located in the Honda vehicle on 12 May 2023.
31Any weight that could attach to the circumstance in Kada is minimal.[1]
[1] Kada v The Queen [2017] VSCA 339
Plea of guilty
32The Sentencing Act 1991 obliges me to take into account the stage at which you entered your plea.
33You indicated your plea of guilty immediately prior to a contested committal hearing listed 2 February 2024.
34I do accept that your plea was at an early opportunity, a fact that is conceded. I am told that you always intended a guilty plea but had to wait until drug analysis was completed to finalise discussions between the parties. This has caused a delay which I accept is likely to have been a source of stress to you.
35Your plea has saved the court the time and expense of contested proceedings and the need for witnesses to give evidence in what would have been likely to be lengthy proceedings.
36Materials before me would indicate that you have expressed remorse. You are aware that you have disappointed family and have shown insight as to the harm drugs have done to you and can do to others. I accept that you have taken responsibility for your offending through your plea of guilty.
37These factors will be taken into account in your favour.
Personal Circumstances
38I turn now to your personal circumstances, which have been helpfully outlined in defence submissions and reports authored by Psychologist Gina Cidoni dated 14 May 2024 and 26 June 2024.
39You were born and raised in Malaysia and are currently 35 years old.
40You have three siblings; two brothers and a sister, who range in age from 28 to 39 years of age. Your youngest brother currently lives in Australia on a bridging visa, after his student visa was cancelled.
41Growing up, your mother conducted home duties, whilst your father worked in logistics and sales and operated a small business. Your parents are currently in their 60s.
42During your childhood, your relationship with your mother and siblings was strained. You endured severe physical abuse at the hands of your mother, which would result in injuries such as nose bleeds. You were also teased by your siblings and told you were adopted, which you believed for a time. You would also bear witness to regular arguments between your parents in relation to finances, however these disagreements did not escalate to physical violence.
43You recounted an incident to Ms Cidoni where your brother struck you in the head with a rock and your mother blamed you. You felt you were often blamed for incidents, even when you were not responsible. You did attempt to run away from home however your family followed you and brought you back.
44When you were 17 years of age, you were involved in an accident in which your motorcycle collided with another vehicle. You sustained a fractured wrist and shoulder and head injuries and believe your memory has been affected as a result. Your relationship with your mother markedly improved after this incident.
45In terms of education, you completed the Year 12 equivalent in Malaysia and commenced studying a degree in Computer Science, however discontinued the course after six months.
46At 18 years of age, you left home to work in another city.
47In terms of your employment history, you have had a range of jobs. In Malaysia, you worked in multiple factories, in hospitality and as a teacher in a private school teaching information technology to Year Ones. You also worked as a clerk at the Registry Office. This is where you met your husband in 2011, who you married when you were 24 years of age and to whom you eventually had a daughter.
48In 2012, your husband developed a gambling addiction and accrued a significant debt. You moved to Melbourne together and eventually settled in Frankston to seek a fresh start. Your daughter remained in Malaysia with your parents, with the aim of eventually having her move to Melbourne with you but this never eventuated.
49In Australia, you worked in a kitchen at Crown Casino washing dishes, followed by two years in a Chinese restaurant in Richmond. You then worked in a Chinese restaurant in the Melbourne CBD for four years
50Your relationship with your husband began to deteriorate between 2013 and 2018, as his gambling addiction continued to grow in severity. He would take your money to feed his habit and gamble. You told Ms Cidoni that he had affairs with other women and eventually began to assault you and that he did so on numerous occasions. You recall him slapping you, pinning you against the wall and strangling you on at least two occasions.
51In terms of substance abuse, your husband introduced you to drugs. Despite your difficult upbringing, your resort to drug use came relatively late in your life and in the context of this relationship. You first tried cannabis on one occasion in 2019. You also tried cocaine for the first time that year and continued to use it occasionally. Around the same time, you began using methylamphetamine and heroin. You continued to use heroin occasionally and would use methylamphetamine every day until your arrest. You report only occasionally consuming alcohol. I do not accept that these factual circumstances are analogous to those in R v McKee [2003] VSCA 18, which was submitted on your behalf.
52You also have a history of problematic gambling behaviours of your own since 2023. You told Ms Cidoni that your gambling increased at the time you were involved in your offending.
53Your relationship with your husband broke down in 2019. He continues to have contact with your daughter however you have not had contact with him since your separation. I accept that your relationship with him was extremely damaging and does give context to your resort to drug usage.
54Following the relationship break down, you experienced transience in relation to housing and often had to stay with friends or your brother. Prior to your arrest, your living situation was unstable and you were couch surfing between your friends’ and brother's places. You were using methylamphetamine daily.
55You reported to Ms Cidoni that, whilst in custody, you have been experiencing high levels of depression and anxiety and have had disrupted sleep patterns. You have been prescribed Prazosin to ease your nightmares.
56At a further plea hearing on 3 July 2024, your sister, Soo Im Ong, gave powerful evidence of your difficult upbringing over a link from Malaysia. Your family was not wealthy and there was at least six of you under the one roof. She spoke of continual parental violence and that she and her other siblings were told that you were adopted and would treat you differently. Your mother's attitude towards you improved for the better after your motorcycle accident when you were 17 years old. She told the court that your family did not have a high regard for your husband but your sister was not aware of any physical violence. Your family were not aware of your drug problem until you went to prison. You have managed to maintain contact whilst on remand, speaking to your sister daily and video conferencing your family monthly. Your daughter has not been told that you are in prison. Your sister described your family relationships as changed and that you are well supported by family. It is hoped by them that you can return to Malaysia as soon as possible.
57I accept that you experienced the personal events which were outlined to me. From leaving the family home until your relationship with your husband, you appear to have strived to lead a good life and to create stability and security for yourself.
58Your Counsel seeks to rely on the Bugmy[2] principles relating to your 'deprived background' to reduce your moral culpability for your offending. I accept that you experienced family violence at the hands of your mother and father and appear to have been bullied by your siblings whilst growing up. These experiences cannot be without their impact in making a contribution to the person you are today and I take them into account in a general sense but I am less convinced that they are independently capable of moderating your moral culpability for your offending in any meaningful way, given that offending involved a systematic operation and involvement in the trafficking of three separate drugs of dependence in the early months of 2023.
[2] Bugmy v The Queen [2013] HCA 37.
59In her first report dated 14 May 2024, Ms Gina Cidoni, psychologist, had assessed you over video on two separate occasions for three hours and with the assistance of an interpreter. I have had recourse to each of her reports. The information she had was all from you and she did not make any independent inquiry of the prison nor of your family to reach her conclusions. I do not doubt your report of your personal circumstances.
60Ms Cidoni relayed your account that your involvement in drug trafficking had its genesis in your husband's debts and you being introduced to the head of the syndicate to help pay off those debts. You recounted playing the role of an interpreter for drug transactions and to being paid with money, drugs and accommodation.
61Ms Cidoni was of the opinion that you had a Substance Use Disorder and presented with Major Depressive Disorder and Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder originating from the abuse of you by your mother, the abuse of you by your husband and subsequent introduction to drugs
62Ms Cidoni opined that your use of drugs played a significant role in your offending as it impaired your judgement and contributed to your preparedness to be involved in risky behaviour. In Ms Cidoni’s opinion, your poor mental health was worsened by your drug use and left you vulnerable to manipulation and less able to grasp the consequences of your actions. Your mental health conditions impaired your ability to make rational decisions and manage stress, making drug use all the more attractive to you.
63Ms Cidoni found that imprisonment is likely to be more burdensome for you as Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder could cause severe distress and your Major Depressive Disorder elevates your risk of self-harm.
64The origins of some of Ms Cidoni’s finding were somewhat opaque and your plea hearing was adjourned from 21 May 2024 to 3 July 2024. In advance of the hearing on 3 July 2024, an addendum report from Ms Cidoni was filed. She had not had any further contact with you nor made any additional enquiries.
65In her addendum report dated 26 June 2024, Ms Cidoni confirms her diagnoses which she links to your childhood trauma, relationship with your husband and the sequalae of that relationship.
66Ms Cidoni clarifies that your drug use was a significant factor in your offending behaviour, but that your Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder still impacts on your behaviour and decision making. This, she states:
“diminishes her capacity to control impulses and make rational decisions, mainly when triggered by chronic stress. This stress included her husband's gambling addiction, extramarital affairs, and physical abuse, which triggered intense emotional turmoil. Instances of physical violence, such as slapping, pinning her against walls, and strangling, exacerbated her PTSD symptoms, impairing her ability to manage impulses and make rational choices. Furthermore, the added pressure of her husband's drug debt heightened the stress. It contributed to a volatile environment that acted as a trigger and affected her emotional well-being and decision-making capabilities.”[3]
[3] Supplementary Psychological Assessment Report of Ms Gina Cidoni dated 26 June 2024, paragraph 23.
67I accept that your relationship with your husband was another source of trauma in your life, however this part of Ms Cidoni's opinion failed to grapple with the simple fact that you had no contact with your husband since 2019 and that there was little or no information as to your circumstances between then and early 2023, other than that you had no stable accommodation, were gambling and using methylamphetamine.
68Ms Cidoni confirmed her opinion that your Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder is likely to make prison more burdensome for you but speaks of the reasons as to why in terms which were not particularised to you.
69At your further plea hearing on 3 July 2024, based on Ms Cidoni's two reports, your Counsel also sought to rely on Limbs 1 to 5 in the decision of R v Verdins & Ors [2007] VSCA 102. That is, it is argued that your impaired mental functioning reduces your moral culpability for your offending; your condition may have a bearing on the kind of sentence imposed; general and specific deterrence should be modified; and the existence of your condition at the time of sentencing may mean the given sentence will weigh more heavily on you that it would on an offender in normal health.
70This submission was resisted by the Crown and a further adjournment was granted for Ms Cidoni to give evidence.
71
Gina Cidoni was called to give evidence on 14 August 2024 and was
cross-examined as to her findings, diagnosis and methodology. Some aspects of her evidence remain unsatisfactory. She agreed that her three hour, in total, assessment of you included interview for 90 minutes and testing for 90 minutes via translation through an interpreter, naturally limiting the period of information gathering. Ms Cidoni agreed that she had not contained some information which she gathered from you in her reports when it perhaps would have added clarity to her reasoning. She had not made any additional enquiries in advance of her evidence, nor had she been made aware of the evidence given by your sister. She was unaware of the dosage you received of your prescribed medication.
72I do not quibble with the findings that you suffer from Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder, Major Depressive Disorder and Substance Use Disorder. The issue is how they apply, alone or in combination, with relevant sentencing considerations.
73In terms of those conditions coexistent with drug use at the time of your offending, Ms Cidoni saw your Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder as chronic. She saw your Substance Use Disorder, Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and depression as co‑existent but agreed that it is difficult to determine which condition was dominant other than to confirm that your use of drugs seemed to be the mechanism which you used to cope or appease your mental wellbeing.
74In the context of her evidence overall, and the nature of your persistent and somewhat sophisticated offending over some months, I am not satisfied that there is a basis to apply limbs 1 to 4 of the decision in Verdins & Ors.[4]
[4] R v Verdins & Ors [2007] VSCA 102.
75Ms Cidoni did provide greater detail to that contained in her reports of the impact upon you of your Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and depression in the prison system. At the time of her assessment of you, she describes your Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder symptoms as very high - you were experiencing sleep disturbance and presented with a high level of depression and anxiety. This is of course in the context of you not accessing illicit substances. She had not put in her reports that you were hypervigilant and panicked and jumping at noises.
76I am satisfied that there is a basis to afford some weight to limb 5 of the decision in Verdins & Ors[5] and take into account that the sentence I must impose will weigh more heavily on you than a person without Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder and Major Depressive Disorder and contained in the prison system.
[5] Ibid.
Prospects of rehabilitation
77You have no prior criminal history.
78You have been on remand since your arrest on 12 May 2023, a period of some 462 days. I accept that there is a degree of sanction and deterrence in the time which you have spent in custody to date.
79You do have the continued support of your family and your parents are aware of your offending. Your sister attended your plea hearings virtually from Malaysia and your brother also attended your initial plea hearing. Despite your ability to have contact with family, it is nevertheless remote and I accept that your experience of prison is somewhat isolating, adding to the impact on you and the deterrent effect.
80Fortunately, your brother has been a continuous support to you whilst you have been in custody and is able to visit you personally fortnightly.
81You are aware that you will be deported back to Malaysia following these proceedings and are looking forward to being reunited with your family and your daughter.
82I do not accept the submission made on your behalf that I can take into account the likelihood of you spending time in immigration detention to moderate your sentence in accordance with Sahhitanandan v The Queen [2019] VSCA 115, in circumstances where such an event is prospective only. At this stage, it is not known whether you will go to immigration detention or how long you would be in immigration detention before any removal and return to Malysia.
83However, as referred to earlier, the delay between being charged and your sentencing in August of 2024 is a factor I take into account in a general sense, in the stress upon you whilst in custody and awaiting the outcome in order to plan your return to family. There have been a number of listings for your plea hearings.
84A recent concern for you in terms of your own health and concern of a breast tumour has been investigated and there was no issue identified in the biopsy taken. This would be an understandable relief.
85Whilst in custody, you have been working in the prison bakery. You have provided clean urine screens and have accessed programs which include 'Empowering Independence'.
86You have also been linked in with the Western Regional Centre Against Sexual Assault (West CASA) and have attended six sessions to date.
87It appears that you are using your time wisely to improve yourself, your wellbeing and this, combined with your motivation to return home, augurs well for your future.
88In terms of risk, Ms Cidoni opined:
“Her risk of reoffending is closely tied to her substance use and overall mental health management. Her risk is high if she relapses into drug use. Conversely, her risk is low if she maintains sobriety and continued to receive appropriate mental health support.”[6]
[6] Psychological Assessment Report of Ms Gina Cidoni dated 14 May 2024, [67].
89I accept this part of her opinion as accurate.
Sentencing principles
90I do make the ancillary order in terms of the disposal and forfeiture as sought by the Crown of scheduled items.
91No comparative cases were provided on your behalf. The Crown did provide me with a table of cases for a general overview of current sentencing practice for offenders without criminal histories charged with drug trafficking and referred me to the other cases, including Gregory v The Queen [2017] VSCA 151, for points of general principle.
92The Crown submitted that a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period is required in your case.
93Your legal representative concedes that a term of imprisonment with a non-parole period is warranted, however seeks that any gaol term not be “crushing” and “allow [you] to see the light at the end of the tunnel”.[7] I accept this submission.
[7] Defence Submissions for Plea dated 19 May 2024, [75].
94The basic purposes for which a court may impose sentence are just punishment, general and specific deterrence, rehabilitation, denunciation and protection of the community. In sentencing you, I must have regard to a range of matters such as the seriousness of the offending, your culpability for it, your personal circumstances and those of any victim.
95I also take into account the important principles of totality and proportionality.
96I am also required to balance the interests of the community in denouncing criminal conduct with the interests of the community in seeking to ensure where possible, that offenders are rehabilitated and are reintegrated into society.
97I have taken into account the sentencing purposes referred to in section 5 of the Sentencing Act where relevant to your case. I have taken into account the current sentencing practices for the offences to which you have pleaded guilty.
98This is the moment gentlemen, Mr Tamburro, any matters that you need to bring to my attention?
99MR TAMBURRO: No, Your Honour, thank you very much.
100HER HONOUR: Mr Ranjit?
101MR RANJIT: Nothing from me, Your Honour. If Your Honour pleases.
102HER HONOUR: Was that a yes or a no, sorry?
103MR RANJIT: No, Your Honour.
104HER HONOUR: All right. I should say, Mr Ranjit, that I will allow you to speak with your client after the conclusion of these proceedings with the assistance of the interpreter.
105MR RANJIT: I'm thankful Your Honour.
106HER HONOUR: Ms Ong, in relation to Charge 1, trafficking in a commercial quantity of a drug of dependence, namely heroin, you are convicted and sentenced to 5 years and 10 months' imprisonment. This is the base sentence.
107In relation to Charge 2, trafficking in a drug of dependence, namely methylamphetamine, you are convicted and sentenced to 2 years and 6 months' imprisonment.
108In relation to Charge 3, trafficking in a drug of dependence, namely cocaine, you are convicted and sentenced to 2 years' imprisonment.
109Twelve months of Charge 2 and six months of Charge 3 are cumulative on each other and on the base sentence.
110Your total effective sentence is therefore one of 7 years and 4 months' imprisonment. I fix a period of 4 years and 6 months before you are eligible for parole.
111I reckon 462 days as having already been served by way of pre-sentence detention.
112Section 6AAA of the Sentencing Act requires me to state the sentence I would have imposed if you had not pleaded guilty to the charges. If not for your pleas of guilty, I would have sentenced you to a total effective sentence of 9 years and 8 months' imprisonment, with a minimum 6 years and 4 months before being eligible for parole.
113I thank each of the advocates for their assistance in this matter. Mr Tamburro I hadn't come across you before, your work was of an extremely high standard, for which I am extremely grateful.
114MR TAMBURRO: Thank you, Your Honour. I am grateful for those comments.
115HER HONOUR: Mr Ranjit, I appreciate your assistance as well and your continued patience with my enquiries made of you.
116Madam Interpreter, thank you very much for your assistance.
117I will now leave you, Mr Ranjit, to speak with your client.
118MR RANJIT: If Your Honour pleases, thank you.
119MR TAMBURRO: As the court pleases.
- - -
0
6
1