R v Nguyen - [2024] NSWDC 273

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Nguyen [2024] NSWDC 273
Hearing dates: 5 July 2024
Date of orders: 5 July 2024
Decision date: 05 July 2024
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Abadee DCJ
Decision:
See paragraphs [111]-[113]

Catchwords:
CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing – offences for accessorial involvement in drug cultivation – offence for perversion of course of justice – past assistance to authorities – hardship to family

Legislation Cited:
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 319
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 5, 23
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act1985 (NSW), s 23

Cases Cited:
Marinellis v R [2006] NSWCCA 307
RvHockey [2006] NSWCCA 146
R v Nguyen [2006] NSWCCA 389
RvPerrier (1990) 59 A Crim R 164
RvWay (2004) 60 NSWLR 168
The Queen v Beckett (2015) 256 CLR 305

Texts Cited:
Nil

Category: Sentence
Parties: Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP)
Mr Huy Hong An Nguyen
Representation:
Counsel:
Ms S Walsh (ODPP)
Mr D Roff for the Offender
Solicitors:
ODPP
Benjamin Leonardo – The Defenders

File Number(s): 2021/00208620
Publication restriction: Pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) the parts of these reasons for judgment which are marked as redacted are not to be published

REMARKS ON SENTENCING

Introduction

Mr Huy Nguyen (‘the offender’) is before the Court for sentencing following guilty pleas, formally entered on the second day of a trial, of three offences on which he was indicted. He adhered to those guilty pleas in this hearing.
Adopting the table from the Crown Sentence Summary, the details of the offences, the statutory provisions, and indications of the maximum penalties and applicable standard non-parole periods (but with certain other information relating to the nature of the offences) is as follows:

Count

Offence

Statutory provision

Max penalty

SNPP?

1

Between 1/10/20 and 20/4/21 at Marrickville, knowingly taking part in the cultivation of a number of prohibited plants (506 cannabis plants) grown by enhanced indoor means, being an amount not less than the large commercial quantity (200 plants) applicable to the prohibited plant

s 23(2)(a) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act1985 (NSW) (‘DMT Act’)

20 years imprisonment

10 years imprisonment

2

Between 30/10/20 and 17/7/21 at Lewisham, knowingly taking part in the cultivation of a number of prohibited plants (99 cannabis plants) grown by enhanced indoor means, being an amount of not less than the commercial quantity (50 plants) applicable to that prohibited plant

s 23(2)(a) of the DMT Act

15 years imprisonment (and/or 3,500 penalty units)

N/A

3

Between 20/4/21 and 27/4/21 at Marrickville, supplying a false lease agreement to Van To Nguyen (the owner of 47 and 47a Chalder St, Marrickville) intending to pervert the course of justice

s 319 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)

14 years imprisonment (if tried summarily: 2 years’ imprisonment)

N/A

The Facts

For the purposes of the sentencing, these were reduced to a statement of agreed facts signed by the offender on 23 April 2024.

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 Nguyen

Details

AGLC: R v Nguyen [2024] NSWDC 273
Case: [2024] NSWDC 273
Decision Date: 05 July 2024

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Nguyen involved the sentencing of a defendant who was found guilty of multiple charges, including accessory involvement in drug cultivation, and perverting the course of justice. The matter was heard in the County Court of Victoria. The defendant, Nguyen, was convicted on the basis of her involvement in a drug trafficking operation, where she played a supportive role in the cultivation and distribution of illicit substances. Additionally, she was found guilty of providing false information to the police during an investigation, which obstructed the course of justice. The case raised significant issues regarding the appropriate sentence for Nguyen, considering her role in the crime, her past cooperation with authorities, and the potential hardship her imprisonment would cause to her family.

The primary legal issues before the court were the determination of an appropriate sentence for Nguyen's criminal activities and the consideration of mitigating factors that might influence the sentence. The court had to balance the need for punishment and deterrence with the principles of rehabilitation and proportionality. Specifically, the court needed to assess the extent of Nguyen's involvement in the drug operation, her role in the crime, and her subsequent cooperation with law enforcement. Furthermore, the court had to evaluate the potential impact of her imprisonment on her family, including her young children, and any hardships this might cause.

The court, in delivering its judgment, considered the various aggravating and mitigating factors presented. It noted Nguyen's significant involvement in the drug cultivation operation, her role in supporting the criminal activities, and her subsequent assistance to the police, which included providing valuable information that led to the arrest of other offenders. The court also acknowledged the substantial hardship that Nguyen's imprisonment would impose on her family, particularly her young children. After weighing these factors, the court determined that an appropriate sentence would reflect the seriousness of the offences while also considering the mitigating circumstances. The court ultimately decided on a sentence that balanced the need for punishment with the potential for rehabilitation and the welfare of Nguyen's family.

The final orders of the court included a custodial sentence for Nguyen, along with specific directions regarding her rehabilitation and support while in custody. The court ordered that Nguyen be sentenced to a term of imprisonment, with particular consideration given to her role in the crimes, her cooperation with authorities, and the impact on her family. The court also directed that appropriate support services be provided to Nguyen and her family during her incarceration to mitigate the potential hardships of her imprisonment.

Orders

Orders of the court

See paragraphs [111]-[113]

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 Nguyen [2024] NSWDC 273
Hearing dates:	5 July 2024
Date of orders:	5 July 2024
Decision date:	05 July 2024
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Abadee DCJ
Decision:	See paragraphs [111]-[113]
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing – offences for accessorial involvement in drug cultivation – offence for perversion of course of justice – past assistance to authorities – hardship to family
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 319 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 5, 23 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act1985 (NSW), s 23
Cases Cited:	Marinellis v R [2006] NSWCCA 307 RvHockey [2006] NSWCCA 146 R v Nguyen [2006] NSWCCA 389 RvPerrier (1990) 59 A Crim R 164 RvWay (2004) 60 NSWLR 168 The Queen v Beckett (2015) 256 CLR 305
Texts Cited:	Nil
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (ODPP) Mr Huy Hong An Nguyen
Representation:	Counsel: Ms S Walsh (ODPP) Mr D Roff for the Offender Solicitors: ODPP Benjamin Leonardo – The Defenders
File Number(s):	2021/00208620
Publication restriction:	Pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW) the parts of these reasons for judgment which are marked as redacted are not to be published

Count	Offence	Statutory provision	Max penalty	SNPP?
1	Between 1/10/20 and 20/4/21 at Marrickville, knowingly taking part in the cultivation of a number of prohibited plants (506 cannabis plants) grown by enhanced indoor means, being an amount not less than the large commercial quantity (200 plants) applicable to the prohibited plant	s 23(2)(a) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act1985 (NSW) (‘DMT Act’)	20 years imprisonment	10 years imprisonment
2	Between 30/10/20 and 17/7/21 at Lewisham, knowingly taking part in the cultivation of a number of prohibited plants (99 cannabis plants) grown by enhanced indoor means, being an amount of not less than the commercial quantity (50 plants) applicable to that prohibited plant	s 23(2)(a) of the DMT Act	15 years imprisonment (and/or 3,500 penalty units)	N/A
3	Between 20/4/21 and 27/4/21 at Marrickville, supplying a false lease agreement to Van To Nguyen (the owner of 47 and 47a Chalder St, Marrickville) intending to pervert the course of justice	s 319 Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)	14 years imprisonment (if tried summarily: 2 years’ imprisonment)	N/A