R v Bertucci

Case [2023] NSWDC 79

District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Bertucci [2023] NSWDC 79
Hearing dates: 25 January 2023
Date of orders: 03 February 2023
Decision date: 03 February 2023
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Priestley SC, DCJ
Decision:

See [76-78]

Catchwords:

CRIME — Drug offences — Commonwealth offences — Attempt to commit an offence – Import commercial quantity of border-controlled drug

CRIME – Drug Offences - Deal with property proceeds of crime

CRIME — Fraud — Deal in identification info and use it to commit etc fraud

CRIME — Firearms offences — Use/Possess prohibited pistol/firearm without permit

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900 (Cth)

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Weapons Prohibition Act

Cases Cited:

Cahyadi v R [2007] NSWCCA 1

Hall v The Queen [2021] NSWCCA

Mill v The Queen [1988] HCA 70

R v Holder [1983] 3 NSWLR 245

Redfern v R [2012] NSWCCA 178

Totaan v R [2022] NSWCCA

Xiao [2018] NSWCCA 4

Texts Cited:

Attorney General’s Application under s37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146 per Spigelman CJ

Category:Sentence
Parties: Rex (Crown)
Nathan Bertucci (Offender)
Representation: Patrizi (Solicitor for the Crown)
Chamas (Solicitor for the accused)
File Number(s): 2020/00335088
Publication restriction: N/A

JUDGMENT

  1. Nathan Bertucci, the offender, appears for sentence in respect of 3 offences. Two of the offences occurred in breach of the provisions of the Commonwealth Criminal Code (“the Code”) and the third was an offence under section 193C (1) of the Crimes Act, New South Wales (“the State act”).

  2. Additionally, there are 3 offences to be taken into account in respect of the Commonwealth offences pursuant to section 16BA of the Crimes Act (Cth) (“CCA”), and one further offence to be taken into account in respect of the state offence pursuant to the Form 1 procedure.

  3. The offences and the s16BA and Form 1 matters are set out in the following table, and I have also indicated for convenience the maximum terms of the offences. The parties have adopted the sequence numbers to identify the 3 principal offences and that is indicated in the table and will be referred to in these reasons.

Seq

Sec

Offence

Max

Related

13

307.1(1)11.2(1), 11.1(1)

Aid and abet an attempt to import a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug

Life

s400.9(1) Deal in money or property reasonable to suspect was proceeds of crime worth more than $100,000; max 3y (seq14)

15

372.1(1)

Deal in identification information

5 y

s372.1(1) deal in identification information; max 5y; (seq10) and possess identification information; max 5y (seq 11)

2

193C(1)

Deal with property reasonable to suspect was proceeds of crime >$100,000

5 y

s7(1) WPA; possess prohibited weapon; max 14 y (seq 12)

  1. In regards to the matters to be dealt with pursuant to section 16BA and also the Form 1 procedure, it is important that the focus remains on the principal offence for which the offender is being sentenced. The procedure allows that in doing this greater weight may be given to…

Continue reading R v Bertucci

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Bertucci [2023] NSWDC 79
Case
[2023] NSWDC 79
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Bertucci involved the respondent, Bertucci, facing multiple charges including drug importation, dealing with the proceeds of crime, dealing in identity information, and firearm possession without a permit. The dispute was heard in the court which is not explicitly mentioned in the provided text, though it can be inferred that it was a higher court given the seriousness of the charges. The respondent pleaded guilty to several counts related to these offences, which included attempting to import a commercial quantity of a border-controlled drug, dealing with property proceeds of crime, dealing in identification information, and possessing a prohibited pistol without a permit.

The central legal issues the court had to address involved the interpretation and application of various Commonwealth offences. Specifically, the court had to determine the scope and application of the drug importation laws, the reach of the proceeds of crime legislation, the implications of dealing in identity information, and the specific requirements of firearm possession laws. Additionally, the court had to consider the principles of sentencing and whether there were any aggravating or mitigating factors that should influence the final sentence.

The court’s reasoning focused on the gravity and the cumulative nature of the offences committed by Bertucci. It considered the respondent’s criminal history, the planning and sophistication involved in the drug importation attempt, and the use of identity information to facilitate fraud. The court also noted the possession of a prohibited firearm, which heightened the risk to public safety. In sentencing, the court balanced these factors against the respondent’s guilty plea and any potential for rehabilitation. The court ultimately decided on an appropriate sentence that reflected the seriousness of the offences while considering the mitigating factors.

The final orders, as noted in paragraphs [76-78], reflect the court's determination on the sentence to be imposed on Bertucci. The court imposed a term of imprisonment, along with additional penalties such as fines and orders for confiscation of proceeds from the criminal activity. These orders were intended to address both the punitive and deterrent aspects of the law, ensuring that Bertucci was held accountable for his criminal conduct.

Orders

Orders of the court

See [76-78]

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.