R v Nguyen and Nguyen
[2017] VCC 205
•8 March 2017
| IN THE COUNTY COURT OF VICTORIA AT MELBOURNE CRIMINAL DIVISION | Revised (Not) Restricted Suitable for Publication |
CR-16-02105 (Tuan Anh NGUYEN)
CR-16-02104 (Linh Ha NGUYEN)
| DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC PROSECUTIONS |
| v |
| TUAN ANH NGUYEN and LINH HA NGUYEN |
---
JUDGE: | HIS HONOUR JUDGE PUNSHON | |
WHERE HELD: | Melbourne | |
DATE OF HEARING: | 2 March 2017 | |
DATE OF SENTENCE: | 8 March 2017 | |
CASE MAY BE CITED AS: | R v Nguyen and Nguyen | |
MEDIUM NEUTRAL CITATION: | [2017] VCC 205 | |
REASONS FOR SENTENCE
---
Subject:
Catchwords:
Legislation Cited:
Cases Cited:
Sentence:
---
APPEARANCES: | Counsel | Solicitors |
| For the DPP | Ms S. Holmes | Office of Public Prosecutions Victoria |
| For the Accused T. Nguyen For the Accused L. Nguyen | Ms D. Lamovie Mr A. Lewin | Victoria Legal Aid |
HIS HONOUR:
1 Tuan Anh Nguyen and Linh Ha Nguyen, you have both pleaded guilty to one charge of cultivation of cannabis in a commercial quantity. The offending period spans early-May to mid-August. Linh Ha Nguyen, you have also pleaded guilty to an additional charge of negligently dealing with the proceeds of crime.
2 The charge of dealing with the proceeds of crime concerns $2750 found in your possession, Ms Nguyen, that you concede was given to you to pay drug house rent.
3 The prosecutor opened the circumstances of the offending by reading from a "Summary of Prosecution Opening", which was tendered.
4 In short, you both cultivated cannabis at two different locations. First, you cultivated a crop at a house at which you resided and then moved out of. You then both cultivated a crop at a second house whilst living at another location. Each crop was grown as part of a large hydroponic set up. Police identified the second crop via an electricity bill for that address, which was located at the time of your arrest.
5 The crop at the first house consisted of 69 plants, weighing 49.39 kg. The second crop consisted of 88 plants, weighing just over 45 kg.
6 You have both consented to me making forfeiture and disposal orders and I will do so.
7 You both exercised your right to not answer questions when interviewed. There was considerable discussion during the pleas concerning the alleged circumstances in which you became involved in the offending. In short, it was claimed that you borrowed $10,000 to pay the hospital fees for the birth of your daughter in November 2015. You were unable to repay this debt and were told it would be waived in exchange for your cooperation and assistance with first, one crop, then the other.
8 I indicated that I was not prepared to act on this account without some evidence. You each declined to give evidence. Despite this I am prepared to accept that the probabilities are that you were both recruited to the task in some manner, probably for financial gain and that others were behind the scheme.
9 You both pleaded guilty at the earliest reasonable opportunity and must benefit from this. Your pleas save time, expense and the need for witnesses to give evidence. I am also prepared to accept that each of you is remorseful for your conduct.
10 Ms Lamovie appeared for you, Mr Nguyen. She tendered a letter of apology written by you as well as a character letter from a "prisoner mentor". You have been in custody since your arrest in August 2016 and have been doing your best to make the most of this time by undertaking courses.
11 You are Vietnamese and came to Australia in 2012 on a student visa that has now been cancelled. You met your wife in secondary school and followed her to Australia. In 2016 you completed a Banking and Finance Degree at La Trobe University. You also worked whilst studying.
12 I accept that imprisonment is difficult and is likely to be a significant deterrent. You are separated from your wife and have no contact with her. You have no other family in Australia. Your mother-in-law was staying with you at the time of your arrest and she has returned to Vietnam with your daughter. You are keen to return to Vietnam as soon as possible.
13 Mr Lewin appeared for you, Ms Nguyen. You are also Vietnamese and time in prison has also been difficult for you for similar reasons to your husband, namely isolation and separation from family and your daughter, in particular.
14 In Australia, you completed a three year Marketing and Event Management course at La Trobe University. You also worked in a nail salon to help support yourself.
15 It is accepted that the roles each played go beyond mere crop sitter and that in each of your cases, the offending should be categorised as mid-range.
16 Neither of you has any prior criminal record or drug history.
17 You are both still youthful. I can see no reason why I should not conclude that you both have good rehabilitation prospects, given your absence of prior criminal histories, the conditions under which you are both incarcerated and the likely impact of this on each of you, together with the supporting material in your case, in particular, Mr Nguyen.
18 It was accepted by both of you that you should each receive the same sentence.
19 You will each be convicted of the cultivation charges and you, Ms Nguyen, will additionally be convicted of the charge of negligently dealing with the proceeds of crime.
20 You will both be sentenced to 30 months' imprisonment, your sentence being an aggregate sentence, Ms Nguyen.
21 In each of your cases, I fix 15 months as the period you must serve before becoming eligible for release on parole.
22 Each of you has now served 203 days in pre-sentence detention. This period is to be reckoned as time already served under the sentence I have imposed.
23 Had you not pleaded guilty, I expect the sentence in each of your cases would have been about 39 months with a non-parole period of about 24 months.
24 I have signed those orders. Is there anything that counsel want sot draw to my attention, anything that needs correcting.
25 COUNSEL: No, Your Honour.
26 HIS HONOUR: All right.
- - -
0
0
0