Legal Research
Cases
Hooker v The Queen

Hooker v The Queen

Case [2019] NSWCCA 283 29 November 2019

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Hooker v R [2019] NSWCCA 283
Hearing dates: 13 November 2019
Decision date: 29 November 2019
Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1];
Leeming JA at [43];
Lonergan J at [44]
Decision:
(1) Leave to appeal is granted.
(2) The appeal is dismissed.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentence appeal – two counts of drug supply – offender on bail for first offence at time of second offence – offender had an extensive criminal record – aggregate sentence of imprisonment for 3 years and 4 months with a non-parole period of 2 years – whether sentence manifestly excessive – leave to appeal granted but appeal dismissed.
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – s 527C(1)(a)
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – s 5(1)(c)
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) – ss 10(1), 25(1)
Cases Cited: AB v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 111; [1999] HCA 46
Barbaro v The Queen; Zirilli v The Queen (2014) 253 CLR 58; [2014] HCA 2
Director of Public Prosecution v Dalgliesh (a pseudonym) (2017) 262 CLR 428; [2017] HCA 41
Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194
Donaghey v R [2015] NSWCCA 119
Hili v The Queen; Jones v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45
Hughes v R [2018] NSWCCA 2
Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25
Pham v R [2014] NSWCCA 115
Price v R [2016] NSWCCA 29
Remington v R [2018] NSWCCA 98
Vandeventer v R [2013] NSWCCA 33
Wong v The Queen; Leung v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 584; [2001] HCA 64
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Virginia Grace Hooker – Applicant
Regina – Respondent Crown
Representation:
Counsel:
I McLachlan – Applicant
D Patch – Respondent Crown
Solicitors:
Watsons Solicitors – Applicant
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions – Respondent Crown

File Number(s): 2018/108517; 2018/372312
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court of NSW

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

17 June 2019

Before:

Bennett SC DCJ

File Number(s):

2018/108517; 2018/372312

JUDGMENT

HOEBEN CJ at CL:

Introduction

The applicant seeks leave, pursuant to s 5(1)(c) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) to appeal against the sentence imposed upon her on 17 June 2019 in the District Court at Parramatta by his Honour Judge Bennett SC.

The applicant pleaded guilty and was sentenced in relation to two offences of supplying a prohibited drug, namely 8.61g of methylamphetamine (the first offence) and 6.77g of methylamphetamine (the second offence) contrary to s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW). Both offences attract a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment.
The sentencing judge took into account six additional offences on a Form 1. In respect of the first offence, four offences were taken into account namely three offences of possess a prohibited drug (cannabis, cannabis resin and buprenorphine) contrary to s 10(1) of the

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 Hooker v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Hooker v The Queen [2019] NSWCCA 283
Case: [2019] NSWCCA 283
Decision Date: 29 November 2019

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appeal heard by the Court was brought by the appellant, Hooker, against a decision of a lower court which upheld a sentence of imprisonment imposed on him for two counts of drug supply. The respondent was the Crown, represented by the Queen. The case arose out of two separate instances where Hooker supplied drugs, the second offence occurring while he was on bail for the first. The appellant had a significant criminal history. The lower court imposed an aggregate sentence of imprisonment for three years and four months, with a non-parole period of two years. Hooker argued that the sentence was manifestly excessive.

The central issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed by the lower court was manifestly excessive, thereby warranting an intervention by the appellate court. The appellant contended that the sentence did not adequately reflect the mitigating factors, including his compliance with bail conditions and his cooperation with authorities. The Crown, on the other hand, submitted that the sentence was appropriate given the nature and circumstances of the offences, as well as the appellant's extensive criminal history.

The court carefully considered the principles of sentencing, including the need to ensure that sentences are proportionate to the gravity of the offence and the offender's criminal history. While acknowledging the appellant's extensive criminal record and the seriousness of the drug supply offences, the court found that the sentence imposed was within the range of acceptable penalties for such crimes. The court also noted the appellant's compliance with bail and cooperation with authorities as mitigating factors, but held that these did not sufficiently outweigh the need for deterrence and denunciation. Consequently, the appeal was dismissed, and the original sentence upheld.

Orders