R v Nguyen

The appeal was brought by Nguyen against her sentence for knowingly taking part in the sale of heroin. Nguyen allowed two of her children to sell heroin from her residence, indirectly benefiting financially from the sale. She was sentenced to five years imprisonment with a non-parole period of two years. The legal issues before the court were whether the sentencing judge should have allowed for the guilty plea, previous periods in custody, and home detention bail, and whether the appropriate weight was given to Nguyen's personal circumstances, and whether the sentence was manifestly excessive and if the sentencing judge erred in failing to suspend the sentence.

The court found that Nguyen's personal circumstances were relevant to the sentence which should be imposed. The delay in sentencing, the appellant's heritage, background, migration, and life in Australia since migration were all relevant. The court agreed with the exercise carried out regarding the time spent in custody and on home detention, and concluded that the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive. However, the court did not agree that the sentence should be suspended. The court found that there are a variety of factors which require the appellant to serve a term of imprisonment.

The appeal was allowed, and the sentence was reduced. The court fixed a fresh head sentence of two years and eight months with a non-parole period of ten months, to take effect from the date of the decision. The court directed that the sentence be suspended on condition that Nguyen enter into a bond to be of good behaviour for a period of two years, under the supervision of a Community Corrections Officer, and obey the lawful directions of the officer assigned to her. However, as the majority of the Court did not favour suspension of the sentence, the appropriate sentence to be imposed was a head sentence of three years and one month with a non-parole period of fifteen months, commencing on a specified date. The court made this order on the condition that any forfeiture of Nguyen's property was limited to the purpose of recovering any benefit which she had received or in which she had participated with members of her family.