SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA
COURT OF APPEAL
S APCR 2018 0106
| KHA LUAN NGUYEN | Appellant |
| v | |
| THE QUEEN | Respondent |
---
| JUDGES: | PRIEST JA and KIDD AJA |
| WHERE HELD: | MELBOURNE |
| DATE OF HEARING: | 8 August 2019 |
| DATE OF JUDGMENT: | 19 August 2019 |
| MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2019] VSCA 184 |
| SENTENCE APPEALED FROM: | (Unreported, 16 April 2018, County Court of Victoria, Judge Coish) |
---
CRIMINAL LAW — Appeal — Sentence — Trafficking in large commercial quantities of drugs of dependence (heroin, cocaine, methylamphetamine) and associated offences — Total effective sentence 20 years’ imprisonment with 16 years non-parole — Totality — Whether sentence manifestly excessive — Appeal dismissed.
---
| APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Appellant | Mr J O'Connor | Valos Black & Associates |
| For the Respondent | Mr J C J McWilliams | Mr John Cain, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions |
PRIEST JA
KIDD AJA:
On 15 August 2018, Niall JA granted leave to appeal against sentence in relation to three grounds of appeal.[1] Leave was granted on grounds 1 and 2 which allege that the sentencing judge erred in making orders for cumulation, and that as a result, the overall sentence breached the principle of totality. Leave was also granted on ground 4 which alleges that the total effective sentence is manifestly excessive.
[1]Kha Luan Nguyen v The Queen (Court of Appeal, Niall JA, 15 August 2018) (‘Leave Reasons’).
On 16 April 2018, the appellant was sentenced in the County Court as follows:
Charge Offence Maximum Penalty Sentence Cumulation 1 Traffick in a drug of dependence – large commercial quantity (heroin) [Drugs, Poisons and Controlled substances Act 1981 (‘the Act’) s 71] Life 14 years Base 2 Traffick in a drug of dependence – large commercial quantity (cocaine) [the Act s 71]* Life 9 years 18 months 3 Traffick in a drug of dependence – large commercial quantity (methylamphetamine) [the Act s 71]* Life 8 years 18 months 4 Traffick in a drug of dependence – (MDMA) [the Act s 71AC] 15 years 18 months 5 months 5 Traffick in a drug of dependence – large commercial quantity (methylamphetamine) [the Act s 71]* Life 6 years 15 months 6 Traffick in a drug of dependence (heroin) [the Act s 71AC] 15 years 15 months 5 months 7 Traffick in a drug of dependence (MDMA) [the Act s 71AC] 15 years 15 months 5 months 8 Possess substance, material, documents or equipment for trafficking in a drug of dependence [the Act s 71A] 10 years 12 months 3 months 9 Possess unregistered general category handgun [Firearms Act 1996 s 7B] 7 years or 600 penalty units 12 months 3 months Related summary charge 11 Possess cartridge ammunition [Firearms Act 1996 s 124] 40 penalty units $400.00 fine -
Total Effective Sentence: 20 years’ imprisonment Non-Parole Period: 16 years Pre-sentence detention declared: 952 days Section 6AAA Statement: 25 years’ with a non-parole period of 20 years Other Orders: Forfeiture and disposal orders. *Sentenced as a ‘serious drug offender’ pursuant to s 6F of the
Continue reading Nguyen v The Queen
Sign in free to access the full text
- AGLC
- Nguyen v The Queen [2019] VSCA 184
- Case
- [2019] VSCA 184
- Decision Date
CaseChat Overview and Summary
In assessing the appeal, the court considered the totality of the offending, which involved the trafficking of substantial quantities of drugs and the associated risks to the community. The court also examined the principles of sentencing, particularly the need for punishment, deterrence, and the promotion of rehabilitation. The court found that the sentence, while severe, was not manifestly excessive. The court emphasised the gravity of the offences, the substantial quantities of drugs involved, and the significant impact on the community. The court concluded that the sentence appropriately balanced the need for punishment and deterrence while also considering the principles of rehabilitation.
The appeal was dismissed by the court. The court held that the sentence was not manifestly excessive and appropriately reflected the seriousness of the offending. The court found that the sentence imposed was commensurate with the gravity of the crimes and the need to protect the community from the harmful effects of drug trafficking. The court's decision underscores the importance of considering the totality of the offending and the principles of sentencing in determining an appropriate sentence for serious drug trafficking offences.
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.