R v Huynh

In the matter of R v Huynh, the applicant was convicted of aggravated break, enter and commit a serious indictable offence and was sentenced by Judge English to imprisonment with a non-parole period of five years and a balance of term of three years. The applicant has brought an application for leave to appeal against the sentence. The applicant pleaded guilty to the offence and, in accordance with Part 4, Division 1A of the Sentencing Procedure Act, a standard non-parole period of five years was fixed for the offence. The court was required to decide whether the sentence was manifestly excessive, whether the standard non-parole period applicable to sentencing after trial was the correct one, and whether the court had failed to give effect to a finding of special circumstances.

The court found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, despite the applicant's argument to the contrary. The court noted that the applicant had a history of drug use, which began at a young age and continued up until the time of the offence. The court also found that the standard non-parole period applicable to sentencing after trial was the correct one, despite the applicant's argument that the standard non-parole period applicable to sentencing after a guilty plea should have been applied. The court found that the offence was in the middle of the range of gravity of offences of its kind and that the element of the offences wrongly taken into account as a circumstance of aggravation did not warrant a departure from the standard non-parole period. The court also found that the discount for plea of guilty had been properly taken into account. The court found that the sentence was not manifestly excessive, taking into account all of the circumstances of the case. The court found that the applicant's subjective circumstances, including his history of drug use and family background, did not warrant a departure from the standard non-parole period.

The final orders of the court were that the application for leave to appeal against sentence be dismissed and that the sentence imposed by Judge English be affirmed.