R v Wat, Kar Wang - [2015] NSWDC 418

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v WAT, Kar Wang [2015] NSWDC 418
Hearing dates: 14 December 2015
Decision date: 14 December 2015
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:
Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [61]

Catchwords: CRIMINAL – supply prohibited drug – ephedrine – large commercial quantity – overseas importation concealed in items within shipping container – SENTENCE – early plea of guilty – no serious health conditions – elderly offender – prior good character – offender a foreign national – motivation of the offender – nature of the operation – seriousness of the offending in light of the claims made by the offender – role of the offender in the operation – general and personal deterrence – minimal assistance to law enforcement -
Legislation Cited: Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth)
Customs Act 1901 (Cth)
Cases Cited: R v Thomson; R v Houlton [2000] 49 NSWCCA 309
Muldrock v The Queen [2011] 244 CLR 120
Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25
Chan and Others [2010] NSWCCA 153
Way v R (2004) 60 NSWLR 168
De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
DS v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 297
Ibrahim Jidah v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 269
Yousef Jidah v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 270
Lachlan Wilson [2014] NSWCCA 266
RCW v R (No 2) [2014] NSWCCA 190
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (Crown)
Kar Wang Wat (Defendant)
Representation: Counsel:
Mr. Amaranth (Crown)
Ms. Fernando (Defendant)

File Number(s): 2014/00294815
Publication restriction: Nil

SENTENCE

HIS HONOUR: Kar Wang Wat appears today for sentence in relation to an offence that alleged that he between 8 August 2014 and 29 August 2014 at Petersham in the State of New South Wales did knowingly take part in the supply of a prohibited drug, to wit, 218,764.5 grams of ephedrine, being an amount which was not less than the large commercial quantity applicable to that prohibited drug.
This is an offence contrary to s 25(2) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. It carries a maximum penalty of life imprisonment and/or a pecuniary penalty of 5,000 penalty units. There is for this offence a standard non-parole period of 15 years’ imprisonment. The minimum amount of the drug ephedrine that attracts the maximum penalty and standard non‑parole period, that is, a large commercial quantity, is 5 kilograms. There are no other matters on a Form 1.
The prisoner pleaded guilty on the presentation of an indictment today, but he had been committed for sentence on 19 May 2015 from the Central Local Court. I propose to give him the benefit of a discount of 25% to represent the utilitarian benefit of the plea of guilty in accordance with the guideline judgment of Thomson and Houlton v R from 1999.
The prisoner, I am informed, was born on 6 June 1949. As I would understand it, he is now 66 years of age and would have…

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 Wat, Kar Wang

Details

AGLC: R v Wat, Kar Wang [2015] NSWDC 418
Case: [2015] NSWDC 418
Decision Date: 14 December 2015

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The appellant was charged with multiple counts of supplying a prohibited drug, specifically ephedrine, in a large commercial quantity. The ephedrine was imported from overseas, concealed within items in a shipping container. The case was heard and determined in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The appellant, who was a foreign national, pleaded guilty to the charges at an early stage of the proceedings.

The court was tasked with determining the appropriate sentence for the appellant. The key legal issues included the nature and seriousness of the offending, the appellant’s role in the operation, his motivation, the circumstances of his offending, and the potential for deterrence. Additionally, the court considered the appellant's early guilty plea, his lack of serious health conditions, his elderly status, prior good character, and whether he provided minimal assistance to law enforcement.

The court found that while the offending was serious due to the large quantity of the drug and the commercial nature of the operation, the appellant's early guilty plea, lack of serious health conditions, and good character were mitigating factors. The court also considered the appellant’s role in the operation and the minimal assistance he provided to law enforcement. Ultimately, the court determined that a full-time custodial sentence was appropriate, taking into account all the circumstances of the case.

The court ordered a full-time custodial sentence, with specific details of the sentence outlined in the judgment at paragraph [61]. This decision reflects the court's consideration of the seriousness of the offending, the appellant's personal circumstances, and the need for general and specific deterrence.

Orders

Orders of the court

Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [61]

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 WAT, Kar Wang [2015] NSWDC 418
Hearing dates:	14 December 2015
Decision date:	14 December 2015
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge S Norrish QC
Decision:	Full-time custodial sentence. For orders see [61]
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL – supply prohibited drug – ephedrine – large commercial quantity – overseas importation concealed in items within shipping container – SENTENCE – early plea of guilty – no serious health conditions – elderly offender – prior good character – offender a foreign national – motivation of the offender – nature of the operation – seriousness of the offending in light of the claims made by the offender – role of the offender in the operation – general and personal deterrence – minimal assistance to law enforcement -
Legislation Cited:	Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) Customs Act 1901 (Cth)
Cases Cited:	R v Thomson; R v Houlton [2000] 49 NSWCCA 309 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] 244 CLR 120 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25 Chan and Others [2010] NSWCCA 153 Way v R (2004) 60 NSWLR 168 De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 DS v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 297 Ibrahim Jidah v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 269 Yousef Jidah v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 270 Lachlan Wilson [2014] NSWCCA 266 RCW v R (No 2) [2014] NSWCCA 190
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (Crown) Kar Wang Wat (Defendant)
Representation:	Counsel: Mr. Amaranth (Crown) Ms. Fernando (Defendant)
File Number(s):	2014/00294815
Publication restriction:	Nil