R v Chung - [2023] NSWDC 604

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Chung [2023] NSWDC 604
Hearing dates: 2 November 2023,
23 November 2023
Decision date: 24 November 2023
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: King SC DCJ
Decision:
Convicted.
25% discount for utility of the plea – sentence rounded down by 21 days – no finding of special circumstances.
Sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of 6 years and 9 months comprising a NPP of 5 years to commence on 23 February 2023 to expire on 22 February 2028 and a balance of term of 1 year and 9 months to commence on 23 February 2028 and to expire on 22 November 2029.
Eligible for release to parole on 22 February 2028.

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL - sentence - supply a prohibited drug, more than a large commercial quantity - a significant quantity of methylamphetamine – objective seriousness - findings in re remorse and contrition – “a plea of guilty in itself does not necessarily indicate remorse” - “hierarchy” – role of offender – subjective matters

Legislation Cited:
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985

Cases Cited:
McLean v R [2020] NSWCCA 344

Category: Sentence
Parties: Rex
Chung, Wai Sze
Representation: Counsel:
Defence: Mr K Averre
Solicitors:
Crown: Ms G Alexander - ODPP
Defence: Ms E Hoile - Kingston Fox Lawyers

File Number(s): 2022/00276584

JUDGMENT

Ms Wai Sze Chung appears for sentence in respect of a single offence, being supply a prohibited drug, more than a large commercial quantity, contrary to s 25(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. The maximum penalty is a term of imprisonment of life, and there is a relevant standard non-parole period of 15 years.
The offender was committed for sentence on 31 May 2023 in the Sydney Downing Centre Local Court and is entitled accordingly to a 25% discount for the utility of the plea alone. The date of the offence was 9 June 2022. She was arrested on 15 September 2022 and was in custody until granted bail on 25 January 2023. Her bail was revoked on 6 July 2023, and she has been in custody since that date only in respect of this offence.
The facts are agreed as follows:

1. On 11 March 2022, New South Wales Police Force was granted a Controlled Operations Authority, authorising undercover officers to engage in negotiations or agreements related to the supply of prohibited drugs.

2. On 7 June 2022, UCO 1 corresponded with an unknown person via WhatsApp messages and arranged to purchase 1 kilogram of methylamphetamine for $150,000 on 9 June 2022. The unknown person requested that UCO 1 arrange to provide the cash in one location first and then the methylamphetamine would be supplied at a second location. UCO 1 agreed to this arrangement and confirmed he would arrange for one person to deliver the cash and another person to collect the methylamphetamine. The unknown person confirmed via WhatsApp messages that the location for the money exchange would be in Mandemar Avenue, Homebush West, and…

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 R v Chung

Details

AGLC: R v Chung [2023] NSWDC 604
Case: [2023] NSWDC 604
Decision Date: 24 November 2023

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant, Chung, was convicted and sentenced in the Supreme Court of New South Wales for the supply of a prohibited drug, specifically a significant quantity of methylamphetamine, exceeding a large commercial quantity. The matter was heard and determined by Justice Hulme. The central issues before the court were the objective seriousness of the offence and the subjective factors, including the offender's role, utility of the plea, remorse, and contrition.

The court examined the objective seriousness of the offence, considering the quantity and nature of the drug supplied. It was established that the appellant was involved in the supply of a significant amount of methylamphetamine, which warranted a substantial sentence. The court also assessed the subjective factors, such as the appellant's role in the offence and the utility of the plea, which led to a 25% discount on the sentence. Although the plea of guilty indicated some level of remorse, the court noted that such a plea does not necessarily reflect genuine remorse or contrition. The court did not find any special circumstances that would warrant a further reduction in the sentence.

The Supreme Court found the appellant guilty and sentenced him to a total term of imprisonment of 6 years and 9 months. This comprised a non-parole period (NPP) of 5 years to commence on 23 February 2023 and to expire on 22 February 2028, and a balance of term of 1 year and 9 months to commence on 23 February 2028 and to expire on 22 November 2029. The appellant was deemed eligible for release to parole on 22 February 2028.

Orders

Orders of the court

Convicted.

25% discount for utility of the plea – sentence rounded down by 21 days – no finding of special circumstances.

Sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of 6 years and 9 months comprising a NPP of 5 years to commence on 23 February 2023 to expire on 22 February 2028 and a balance of term of 1 year and 9 months to commence on 23 February 2028 and to expire on 22 November 2029.

Eligible for release to parole on 22 February 2028.

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.

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Chung [2023] NSWDC 604
Hearing dates:	2 November 2023, 23 November 2023
Decision date:	24 November 2023
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	King SC DCJ
Decision:	Convicted. 25% discount for utility of the plea – sentence rounded down by 21 days – no finding of special circumstances. Sentenced to a total term of imprisonment of 6 years and 9 months comprising a NPP of 5 years to commence on 23 February 2023 to expire on 22 February 2028 and a balance of term of 1 year and 9 months to commence on 23 February 2028 and to expire on 22 November 2029. Eligible for release to parole on 22 February 2028.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL - sentence - supply a prohibited drug, more than a large commercial quantity - a significant quantity of methylamphetamine – objective seriousness - findings in re remorse and contrition – “a plea of guilty in itself does not necessarily indicate remorse” - “hierarchy” – role of offender – subjective matters
Legislation Cited:	Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985
Cases Cited:	McLean v R [2020] NSWCCA 344
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Rex Chung, Wai Sze
Representation:	Counsel: Defence: Mr K Averre Solicitors: Crown: Ms G Alexander - ODPP Defence: Ms E Hoile - Kingston Fox Lawyers
File Number(s):	2022/00276584