Huynh v The Queen

Case [2021] NSWCCA 148


Court of Criminal Appeal


Supreme Court


New South Wales

  • Summary available
  • Amendment notes
Medium Neutral Citation: Huynh v R [2021] NSWCCA 148
Hearing dates: 21 May 2021
Date of orders: 9 July 2021
Decision date: 09 July 2021
Before: Bathurst CJ at [1];
Beech-Jones J at [2];
N Adams J at [59].
Decision:

The questions posed by the case stated are answered as follows:

(1) On an appeal against sentence brought pursuant to s 11(1) of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) does the District Court have the power to set aside the conviction imposed by the Local Court, dismiss the charge, and discharge the appellant pursuant to s 20BQ(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)?

   ANSWER: No.

(2) On an appeal against conviction brought pursuant to s 12(1) of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) does the District Court have the power to set aside the conviction imposed by the Local Court, dismiss the charge and discharge the appellant pursuant to s 20BQ(1) of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)?

   ANSWER: Yes.

(3) On an appeal against sentence brought pursuant to s 11(1) of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act2001 (NSW) does the District Court have the power to set aside the conviction imposed by the Local Court and make orders pursuant to s 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)?

   ANSWER: No.

(4) On an appeal against conviction brought pursuant to s 12(1) of the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) does the District Court have the power to set aside the conviction imposed by the Local Court and make orders pursuant to s 19B of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)?

   ANSWER: Yes.

Catchwords:

CRIMINAL LAW – powers of District Court in hearing appeal from Local Court under Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 – federal offences – whether District Court can exercise power under s 19B of Crimes Act 1914 – whether District Court can exercise power under s 20BQ of Crimes Act 1914 – Judiciary Act, s 68 and s 79 – whether powers can be exercised on appeal against sentence if no power to set aside conviction – whether powers can be exercised on appeal against conviction.

Legislation Cited:

Australian Constitution

Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW)

Crimes (Appeal and Review) Amendment Act 2009 No 4 (NSW)

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)

Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)

Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)

Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW)

Criminal Code (Cth)

Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)

Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW)

District Court Act 1973 (NSW)

Federal Court of Australia Act 1976 (Cth)

Judiciary Act 1903 (Cth)

Justices Act 1902 (NSW)

Mental Health (Forensic Provisions) Act 1990 (NSW)

Mental Health and Cognitive Impairment Forensic Provisions Act 2020 (NSW)

Cases Cited:

Advanced Arbor Service Pty Ltd v Strathfield Municipal Council [2006] NSWLEC 485

Ah Yick v Lehmert (1905) 2 CLR 593; [1905] HCA 22

ASIC v Edensor Nominees Pty Ltd (2001) 204 CLR 559; [2001] HCA 1

Boulter v…

Continue reading Huynh v The Queen

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
Huynh v The Queen [2021] NSWCCA 148
Case
[2021] NSWCCA 148
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Huynh, was convicted in the Local Court and sought to appeal against both his conviction and sentence to the District Court. The appeal was heard under the Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001, and Huynh argued that the District Court should exercise its powers under sections 19B and 20BQ of the Crimes Act 1914. These sections empower the court to set aside a conviction or sentence, respectively, if the court considers it appropriate. The central issue before the court was whether the District Court had the requisite powers under these sections to address an appeal against sentence when it had no power to set aside a conviction, and whether the powers could be exercised on an appeal against conviction.

The court examined the relevant provisions of the Crimes Act 1914, as well as sections 68 and 79 of the Judiciary Act, to determine the extent of the District Court's authority in such circumstances. It found that while the District Court could exercise its powers under sections 19B and 20BQ to set aside a conviction or sentence, these powers could not be exercised when the court was limited to an appeal against sentence and had no power to set aside a conviction. The court also noted that the powers under sections 19B and 20BQ could be exercised on an appeal against conviction, provided the court had the authority to set aside the conviction. This was a critical finding as it clarified the scope and limitations of the District Court's powers in appeals against sentence.

In conclusion, the court held that the District Court did not have the power to exercise its authority under sections 19B and 20BQ of the Crimes Act 1914 in an appeal against sentence when it had no power to set aside a conviction. However, the court did retain the ability to exercise these powers in an appeal against conviction, provided it had the requisite authority to set aside the conviction. This decision provides clarity on the powers of the District Court in handling appeals from the Local Court and the scope of its authority under the Crimes Act 1914.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full text does not contain this section.

Background

Background to the litigation

Full text does not contain this section.

Evidence

Evidence Before The Court

Full text does not contain this section.

Decision

Reasons for decision

Full text does not contain this section.

Ratio Decidendi

Legal Principle Established

Full text does not contain this section.