R v Nguyen
[2006] VSCA 20
•13 February 2006
SUPREME COURT OF VICTORIA
COURT OF APPEAL
No. 217 of 2005
| THE QUEEN |
| v. |
| PHI HOANG NGUYEN |
---
JUDGES: | WARREN, C.J., CHARLES and CHERNOV, JJ.A. | |
WHERE HELD: | MELBOURNE | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 13 February 2006 | |
DATE OF JUDGMENT: | 13 February 2006 | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2006] VSCA 20 | |
---
CRIMINAL LAW – Home invasions – Sentence not manifestly excessive – Application dismissed.
---
| APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the Crown | Mrs M.M. Williams, S.C. | Mr S. Carisbrooke, Acting Solicitor for Public Prosecutions |
| For the Applicant | Ms F. Dalziel | Victoria Legal Aid |
WARREN, C.J. (for the Court):
In this application the Court has had the benefit of the statement of the facts and circumstances delivered by the sentencing judge in his remarks on sentence and, further, the reasons for judgment of Callaway, J.A. in the appeal of the Director relating to the co-accused.[1] More recently, the Court has had the benefit of the reasons for judgment of Ormiston, J.A. delivered on 18 November 2005 on the initial application made under s.582 of the Crimes Act 1958. The Court does not consider it necessary, therefore, to revisit the facts and circumstances therein.
[1]DPP v. Karipis [2005] VSCA 119.
The Court has considered the matters urged both in written and oral submissions by Ms Dalziel for the applicant. However, the Court does not consider the matter is one appropriate for the granting of leave, for the reasons stated by Ormiston, J.A. on 18 November 2005, and which reasons the Court gratefully adopts.
Accordingly, the application will be refused and dismissal ordered accordingly.
---