Nguyen v The King

The appellant, Nguyen, was convicted of armed robbery in company, a Category 2 offence under the Crimes Act 1958. He was sentenced to two years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of one year. Nguyen appealed against his sentence, arguing that it was manifestly excessive. The appeal was brought before the Supreme Court of Victoria, which had to determine whether the sentence was reasonably arguable as being manifestly excessive, and if leave to appeal should be granted.

The court considered the principle that the power to grant leave to appeal is to be exercised sparingly and that the appeal should only proceed if the sentence is reasonably arguable as being manifestly excessive. The court examined the totality of the circumstances, including the nature of the offence, the degree of Nguyen's participation, and the need to ensure general deterrence. The court noted that the sentence imposed was within the range of sentences typically imposed for this type of offence, and that it was not possible to say that the sentence was manifestly excessive. The court concluded that the sentence was not reasonably arguable as being manifestly excessive.

Consequently, the court dismissed the appeal and refused the application for leave to appeal. The sentence imposed by the County Court was affirmed, and Nguyen was to serve the two-year sentence with a non-parole period of one year. The reasoning of the court was based on the principle that the appeal should only proceed if the sentence was reasonably arguable as being manifestly excessive, and that the sentence imposed was within the range of sentences typically imposed for this type of offence. The court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, and that the appeal should not proceed.