R v Bui

The appeal concerned the sentencing of the appellant for serious drug offences committed in South Australia in 2011 and 2013. The appellant had previously failed to answer bail for these charges, leading to their delay. While on bail, he committed a further drug offence in New South Wales in 2014, for which he received a six-year sentence with a non-parole period of three years. Upon completing this non-parole period, he was extradited to South Australia and subsequently sentenced to 10 years and four months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of seven and a half years. The appeal was heard by Kourakis CJ, Vanstone and Kelly JJ.

The central legal issues before the court were whether drug addiction was a relevant factor in sentencing in the appellant's circumstances, whether the principles established in *R v Todd* and *Mill v The Queen* applied, and whether the South Australian sentence was manifestly excessive, particularly in light of the time already served in New South Wales. The appellant argued that both the individual sentences and the total sentence imposed in South Australia were too severe, and that insufficient weight had been given to the three years of imprisonment already served in New South Wales.

The court found that the sentences imposed were just and fair. While the sentencing judge did not explicitly mention the totality principle, the court was satisfied that the judge was aware of it. The court concluded that the sentences, both individually and in totality, did not warrant a reduction based on the totality principle or the period already served in New South Wales. The court also found no error in the sentencing judge's approach to the appellant's drug addiction, implying it was considered but did not necessitate a reduction in the sentence. The appeal was dismissed.