R v Lee

[2018] NSWDC 84

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Lee [2018] NSWDC 84
Hearing dates:	23 February 2018
Date of orders:	23 February 2018
Decision date:	23 February 2018
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Berman SC DCJ
Decision:	On the offence of drug supply dealt with in the Local Court initially by the s 9 bond I impose a period of imprisonment of six months. Taking into account the Form 1 matters for the offence of ongoing supply I sentence Mr Lee to imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period of two years and a head sentence of four years
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence – Form 1 – Ongoing drug supply – Supply prohibited drugs – Deal with the proceeds of crime – Offender of s9 bond at time of offending – Offender’s health has improved while in jail – Harm caused by drug supply
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	The Crown Mark Lee
Representation:	Counsel: Mr A Parsons – The offender   Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions
File Number(s):	2017/47897

Judgment

1. HIS HONOUR: It is a remarkable thing to say, but quite often in these Courts someone appears for sentence having benefited in obvious ways from the circumstance that they have spent some time in gaol. Mr Lee is one such person. Before his arrest he was a substantial drug user with the physical and mental problems that that inevitably causes. After being in custody, and not using drugs for some time, his parents who visit him regularly have noticed a substantial change in him. He has become more coherent, his skin has cleared up, he has put on weight and he looks a lot healthier. What this demonstrates of course is the harm that drug dealing causes to people who use drugs, and Mr Lee was a substantial drug dealer indeed.

2. He now faces sentence having pleaded guilty at the Local Court to an offence of ongoing drug supply. The fact that he pleaded guilty in the Local Court means that I will discount the sentence I would otherwise have imposed by about 25% to reflect the utilitarian value of his plea. When I sentence him for that offence he asks that I take into account three other matters, supplying 4.31 grams of heroin, possessing 1.72 grams of methylamphetamine, and dealing with the proceeds of crime.

3. Mr Lee’s drug dealing activities were detected by police after they set up a scheme targeting drug dealing in the Redfern area. As far as Mr Lee is concerned the most important aspect of this scheme was that there was a registered source who approached Mr Lee on six occasions and were supplied drugs by him.

4. On the first occasion he supplied $700 worth of methylamphetamine and then after that: $900 worth of methylamphetamine; $1,500 worth of methylamphetamine; $750 worth of methylamphetamine; $1,350 worth of heroin; and lastly $4,000 worth of heroin. These are substantial quantities. They are above the street level deals which s 25A offences usually involve. Mr Lee is not your usual street level dealer. He clearly was quite deeply involved in drug supply telling the registered source that he had easy access to significant quantities of drugs. In terms of objective gravity this offence is at least in the middle of the range. In making that assessment of course I take into account that it is fortunate that the drugs purchased by the registered source did not make their way to drug users and so these supplies did not result in actual harm to anybody, but of course Mr Lee was not to know that.

5. Mr Lee has a criminal history involving offences of this type and indeed he was on a s 9 bond for drug supply which was imposed upon him only a very short time before he began supplying drugs to the registered source as part of this offence.

6. As Mr Lee was growing up he appears to have been a fine student. He was born in South Korea. His father who was an electrician came to Australian in 1986 and the following year his wife and the offender came to Australia as well, the offender being four years of age at the time. He completed Year 12. He got a decent ATAR allowing him to study economics at the University of Sydney. He was doing well at his studies, but unfortunately he began to use drugs. His parents observed a change in behaviour, he lost weight, he developed a skin condition, he became angry and would fly into rages and smash property. He was coming home late at night and sometimes not coming home at all. His parents realised that he was an ice addict.

7. Mr Lee senior, the offender’s father, says that “he caused us immense stress over the next few years”. I have no doubt that that is an understatement. His parents did all that they could to try and assist their son. They had him admitted to institutions for drug rehabilitation. They arranged for a Naltrexone implant. He underwent detoxification programs on five occasions at various hospitals, but nothing succeeded until his arrest. Since then he has changed in a remarkable way as I have already mentioned. He recognises how badly he has treated his parents.

8. His parents are in Court today, they have stood by him and they are to be congratulated for doing so. When he is released from custody they will have him back at home and his father will take his son to work with him.

9. This is yet another example of the terrible harm that drug use causes to drug users and the wider community. Mr Lee had a promising career ahead of him, he was going to be a worthwhile and productive member of society who would have been proud of what he had achieved. The use of drugs led him to behave in a serious criminal way, to abuse the love that his parents were showing him, and to cause a great deal of harm to others.

10. There are prospects that Mr Lee will be able to rehabilitate himself and get himself back on the path he was treading before he began to use drugs, but no one is going to suggest that the path ahead will be easy for him, the many failed attempts at drug rehabilitation are testament to that. For that reason there are special circumstances in this case.

11. I have also been asked to deal with the breach of the s 9 bond which was imposed for dealing in drugs in the Local Court. I will do that by imposing a fixed term of imprisonment on Mr Lee and starting the sentence for the ongoing drug supply matter two months after 14 February 2017 which was the day of Mr Lee’s arrest for this matter.

12. On the offence of drug supply dealt with in the Local Court initially by the s 9 bond I impose a period of imprisonment of six months to date from 14 February 2017.

13. Taking into account the Form 1 matters for the offence of ongoing supply I sentence Mr Lee to imprisonment consisting of a non-parole period of two years and a head sentence of four years to have commenced on 14 April 2017.

14. Mr Lee’s non-parole period will expire on 13 April 2019 on which day he is eligible to be released to parole. I will make the confiscation order by consent.

15. I note that sequences 1,2,4 and 6 are withdrawn and I will dismiss them. Thank you.

**********

Decision last updated: 09 April 2018