Legal Research
Cases
Prince v The Queen

Prince v The Queen

Case [2020] NSWCCA 110 4 June 2020

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: Prince v R [2020] NSWCCA 110
Hearing dates: 17 April 2020
Date of orders: 04 June 2020
Decision date: 04 June 2020
Before: Bell P at [1]
Davies J at [2]
Button J at [100]
Decision:
(1) Leave to appeal granted.
(2) Appeal dismissed.
Catchwords:
CRIME – appeal – sentencing - drug offences - supply prohibited drug on ongoing basis – further count of ongoing supply on Form 1 – second count of knowingly direct activities of a criminal group – offences of supply prohibited drug and knowingly deal with proceeds of crime on second Form 1
SENTENCING - appeal - whether sentencing judge found ongoing supply offence was aggravated by being committed for financial reward - whether judge erred in determination of objective seriousness – whether sentencing judge took into account positive features of applicant’s subjective circumstances - whether judge failed to deal in substance with question of likelihood of reoffending and rehabilitation – relationship between rehabilitation and likelihood of reoffending - issue of parity with co-offender – where co-offender’s lower sentence reduced further after earlier appeal – where co-offender found to have minimal role in the drug supply – where co-offender charged only with drug supply – no justifiable sense of grievance - whether aggregate sentence manifestly excessive – reliance on statistics – where each ongoing supply offence exceeded the minimum number of supplies to constitute the offences - generous reduction of the non-parole period by sentencing judge - sentence not manifestly excessive
Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) ss21A, 93T
Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) s 25A
Cases Cited: Cahyadi v R (2007) 168 A Crim R 41
Hordern v R [2019] NSWCCA 210
Kay v R [2019] NSWCCA 275
Masters v R [2019] NSWCCA 233
Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282
Newman v R [2018] NSWCCA 208
Obeid v R [2017] NSWCCA 221
Skocic v R [2014] NSWCCA 225
Zuffo v R [2017] NSWCCA 187
Texts Cited: Nil
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Bianca Prince (Applicant)
Crown (Respondent)
Representation:
Counsel:
M C Ramage QC (Applicant)
D Patch (Respondent)
Solicitors:
Jeffreys Lawyers (Applicant)
Solicitor for Public Prosecutions (Respondent)

File Number(s): 2017/339736
Publication restriction: Nil
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court of NSW

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Citation:

Nil

Date of Decision:

26 April 2019

Before:

Delaney ADCJ

File Number(s):

2017/339736

Judgment

BELL P: I agree with Davies J.
DAVIES J: The applicant pleaded guilty to two charges as follows:

Count 1: Supply prohibited drug on an ongoing basis contrary to s 25A of the Drugs (Misuse and Trafficking) Act 1985 (NSW). The maximum penalty for this offence is 20 years’ imprisonment.

Count 2: Knowingly direct the activities of a criminal group whose activities were organised and ongoing contrary to s 93T(4A) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). The maximum penalty for this offence is 15 years’ imprisonment.

There was a Form 1 attached to the first offence containing…

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 Prince v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Prince v The Queen [2020] NSWCCA 110
Case: [2020] NSWCCA 110
Decision Date: 04 June 2020

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Prince v The Queen involved the appellant, who had been convicted of various drug-related offences, appealing against his sentence. The appellant was found guilty of the ongoing supply of a prohibited drug, a second count of ongoing supply, knowingly directing the activities of a criminal group, and dealing with the proceeds of crime. The case was heard in the High Court of Australia. The central issue for the court was whether the sentencing judge correctly identified the aggravating factors of the ongoing supply offence, specifically if the judge had erred in determining the objective seriousness of the crimes and whether the judge appropriately considered the appellant’s subjective circumstances. Another issue was whether the sentencing judge failed to sufficiently address the likelihood of reoffending and the potential for rehabilitation. Additionally, the court examined the relationship between rehabilitation and the likelihood of reoffending, as well as the question of parity with a co-offender whose sentence had been reduced on appeal. The court ultimately determined that the sentencing judge did not err in their assessment of the aggravating factors or the objective seriousness of the offences. The court found that the judge appropriately considered the appellant’s subjective circumstances and did not fail to adequately address the likelihood of reoffending and rehabilitation. The court also found that there was no justifiable sense of grievance regarding the disparity between the appellant's sentence and that of his co-offender. The High Court concluded that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, noting the generous reduction of the non-parole period by the sentencing judge. The appeal was dismissed.

Orders