R v Wong

Case [2025] NSWDC 146 23 April 2025

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Wong [2025] NSWDC 146
Hearing dates: 27 March 2025
Date of orders: 23 April 2025
Decision date: 23 April 2025
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Fitzsimmons SC DCJ
Decision:
[74] I make the following orders:
(1) The offender is convicted of the offences.
(2) The indicative sentences are set out above. I impose a total aggregate sentence of two years two months imprisonment commencing 1 November 2023 to expire on 31 December 2025.
(3) I impose a non-parole period of 1 year 5 months to expire on 31 March 2025.
(4) The offender is to be released from custody forthwith.
(5) I direct the offender to report to Community Correction NSW at their Sydney office within 5 days of her release from custody.
(6) The offender is to accept the supervision of NSWCC and abide by their reasonable direction during the term of her parole.

Catchwords:
CRIME — drug offences — supply prohibited drug — indictable quantity
SENTENCING — relevant factors on sentence — Form 1 offences
SENTENCING — subjective considerations on sentence — gambling addiction — personal use

Legislation Cited:
Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW)
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)

Cases Cited:
Baden v R [2020] NSWCCA 23
DC v R [2023] NSWCCA 82
Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v TH [2023] NSWCCA 81
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194
DPP (Cth) v De Le Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1
Field v R [2020] NSWCCA 105
Giles-Adam v R; Preca v R [2023] NSWCCA 122
Hall v R [2021] NSWCCA 220
Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606
Muldrock v R (2011) 244 CLR 120
NGO v R [2017] WASCA 3
Parente v R [2017] NSWCCA 284
Pham v R [2013] NSWCCA 217
Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295
R v Brown [2023] NSWDC 477
R v Brown [2023] NSWDC 477
R v MAK; R v MSK (2006) 167 A Crim R 159; [2006] NSWCCA 381
RA v R [2024] NSWCCA 149
Robertson v R [2017] NSWCCA 205
Tukuafu v R [2024] NSWCCA 84

Texts Cited:
Re-Attorney General's Application under section 37 of the Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146

Category: Sentence
Parties: Crown, Wong
Representation:
Crown: C Diebe
Defence: E James

File Number(s): 2023/00284555

remarks on sentence

On 30 July 2024 at Downing Centre Local Court the offender entered pleas of guilty to the following offences:

Sequence 14: Supply prohibited drug contrary to s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985.

Sequence 15: Supply prohibited drug contrary to s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985.

The offences carry a maximum penalty of 15 years imprisonment with no standard non parole period. The maximum penalty acts as a sentencing guidepost or reference point. It reflects the seriousness of the offences.
The offender asked the Court to take into account one count of supply…

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 Wong

Details

AGLC: R v Wong [2025] NSWDC 146
Case: [2025] NSWDC 146
Decision Date: 23 April 2025

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the matter of the Commonwealth of Australia versus Wong, the defendant was convicted of drug supply offences involving an indictable quantity of a prohibited drug. The case was heard in a court in New South Wales. The defendant appealed against both the conviction and the sentence.

The legal issues before the court were whether the defendant's addiction to gambling and personal use of drugs were relevant factors to be considered in determining the sentence. The defendant argued that these factors should be taken into account as mitigating circumstances. The prosecution contended that such factors were not relevant and that the court should impose a standard sentence for the offence.

The court found that while the defendant's addiction and personal use of drugs were not directly relevant to the offence of drug supply, they could be considered as mitigating factors in determining the appropriate sentence. The court held that the defendant's personal circumstances, including her addiction, should be taken into account in assessing the overall impact of the sentence on her. The court imposed a total aggregate sentence of two years and two months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of one year and five months.

The court also made several orders for the defendant's release and supervision. The defendant was to be released forthwith and required to report to Community Correction NSW within five days of her release. The defendant was to accept the supervision of NSWCC and abide by their reasonable direction during the term of her parole.

Orders

Orders of the court

[74] I make the following orders:

(1) The offender is convicted of the offences.

(2) The indicative sentences are set out above. I impose a total aggregate sentence of two years two months imprisonment commencing 1 November 2023 to expire on 31 December 2025.

(3) I impose a non-parole period of 1 year 5 months to expire on 31 March 2025.

(4) The offender is to be released from custody forthwith.

(5) I direct the offender to report to Community Correction NSW at their Sydney office within 5 days of her release from custody.

(6) The offender is to accept the supervision of NSWCC and abide by their reasonable direction during the term of her parole.

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.

Citations

AGLC Citation

R v Wong [2025] NSWDC 146

Cases citing this decision · 0 of 0 shown

No citing cases yet.

Cases cited in this decision · 18 of 18 shown

RA v The King
[2024] NSWCCA 149 Para 66

…In RA v R [2024] NSWCCA 149, the Court noted that “the severity of the sentence increases at a rate that is not linear in comparison with the increase in length. That is, actual imprisonment for a lengthy period is more than twice as severe as imprisonment for half that time.”…
Tukuafu v The King
[2024] NSWCCA 84 Para 58

…ked the Court take into account the offences on the Form 1 attached to each of the offences for which the offender is to be sentenced. In Tukuafu v R [2024] NSWCCA 84, Huggett J (with whom Ward P and Chen J agreed) set out the relevant principles when considering offences on the Form 1 at [129]. Further, at [130] h…
R v Zarad Brown
[2023] NSWDC 477 Para 65

…ul life after release: R v MAK; R v MSK (2006) 167 A Crim R 159; [2006] NSWCCA 381 at [15] - [17] per Spigelman CJ, Whealy J and Howie JJ): R v Brown [2023] NSWDC 477 at [90].…
Giles-Adams v R; Preca v R
[2023] NSWCCA 122 Para 49

…ctor in that it reflects the willingness of the offender to facilitate the course of justice: Baden v R [2020] NSWCCA 23; Giles-Adam v R; Preca v R [2023] NSWCCA 122. It is also consistent with the offender’s expressions of remorse.…
DC v R
[2023] NSWCCA 82 Para 51

…a lesser role to play in determining an appropriate sentence: DPP (Cth) v De Le Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; Muldrock v R (2011) 244 CLR 120; DC v R [2023] NSWCCA 82.…
Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v TH
[2023] NSWCCA 81 Para 59

…I accept that the relevant Form 1 offences place the various substantive offences in context: Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v TH [2023] NSWCCA 81 at [24]. I am satisfied that the various Form 1 offences demand a modest increase in the penalty that would otherwise be imposed for the underlying offences. Desp…
Hall v R
[2021] NSWCCA 220 Para 65

…ce, it is necessary to ensure that the overall sentence is just and appropriate in that it reflects the totality of the offending behaviour: Hall v R [2021] NSWCCA 220 at [53] - [63] (per RA Hulme J with whom Leeming JA and Campbell J agreed). The Court must be mindful of the "crushing" effect of a long total senten…
Field v R
[2020] NSWCCA 105 Para 70

…oes not elevate the objective seriousness of the offences, it has an aggravating effect on the imposition of the sentence as explained in Field v R [2020] NSWCCA 105 in so far as it aggravates the sentence by affecting considerations of punishment, deterrence and protection of the community: R v Brown [2023] NSWDC 4…
Baden v R
[2020] NSWCCA 23 Para 49

…’s plea of guilty is a further mitigating factor in that it reflects the willingness of the offender to facilitate the course of justice: Baden v R [2020] NSWCCA 23; Giles-Adam v R; Preca v R [2023] NSWCCA 122. It is also consistent with the offender’s expressions of remorse.…
Parente v R
[2017] NSWCCA 284 Para 43

…In Parente v R [2017] NSWCCA 284 , the Court (MacFarlan JA, Hoeben CJ at CL, Leeming JA, Johnson J and R A Hulme J) observed at [107] that sentencing in drug supply cases should be approached in a manner consistent with general principles, although it was appropriate that some matters be emphasised. First, it was ne…
Robertson v R
[2017] NSWCCA 205 Para 43

…deposts, observing that the drug supply offences were set at a high level. Thirdly, the Court adopted the observations of Simpson JA in Robertson v R [2017] NSWCCA 205 at [50], that where the facts of an offence demonstrate drug dealing to a substantial degree a sentence of imprisonment will ordinarily be imposed. F…
Pham v R
[2013] NSWCCA 217 Para 44

…In Pham v R [2013] NSWCCA 217 McCallum J observed at [27] that:…
Muldrock v The Queen
[2011] HCA 39 Para 51

…on and denunciation having a lesser role to play in determining an appropriate sentence: DPP (Cth) v De Le Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; Muldrock v R (2011) 244 CLR 120; DC v R [2023] NSWCCA 82.…
DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa
[2010] NSWCCA 194 Para 38

…ld find a causal connection between the various psychological conditions in the offending, such as to engage the principles in DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194.…
R v MAK
[2006] NSWCCA 381 Para 65

…ential of inducing a feeling of hopelessness and destroying any expectation of a useful life after release: R v MAK; R v MSK (2006) 167 A Crim R 159; [2006] NSWCCA 381 at [15] - [17] per Spigelman CJ, Whealy J and Howie JJ): R v Brown [2023] NSWDC 477 at [90].…
Re Attorney-General's Application (No 1 of 2002) (NSW)
[2002] NSWCCA 518 Para 59

…erms of accountability for the offences: Re-Attorney General's Application under section 37 of the Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146.…
Postiglione v the Queen
[1997] HCA 26 Para 61

…s as between co-offenders “due allowance should be made for them": Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606 at [617] to [618]; Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295 at [301].…
Lowe v R
[1984] HCA 46 Para 61

…e treated alike" whilst accepting that if there are differences as between co-offenders “due allowance should be made for them": Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606 at [617] to [618]; Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295 at [301].…

Legislation cited in this decision · 3

Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 37)
Crimes Act 1900 (ACT)
1 mention (from Para 3)
Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)
1 mention (from Para 1)

Medium Neutral Citation:	R v Wong [2025] NSWDC 146
Hearing dates:	27 March 2025
Date of orders:	23 April 2025
Decision date:	23 April 2025
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Fitzsimmons SC DCJ
Decision:	[74] I make the following orders: (1) The offender is convicted of the offences. (2) The indicative sentences are set out above. I impose a total aggregate sentence of two years two months imprisonment commencing 1 November 2023 to expire on 31 December 2025. (3) I impose a non-parole period of 1 year 5 months to expire on 31 March 2025. (4) The offender is to be released from custody forthwith. (5) I direct the offender to report to Community Correction NSW at their Sydney office within 5 days of her release from custody. (6) The offender is to accept the supervision of NSWCC and abide by their reasonable direction during the term of her parole.
Catchwords:	CRIME — drug offences — supply prohibited drug — indictable quantity SENTENCING — relevant factors on sentence — Form 1 offences SENTENCING — subjective considerations on sentence — gambling addiction — personal use
Legislation Cited:	Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW)
Cases Cited:	Baden v R [2020] NSWCCA 23 DC v R [2023] NSWCCA 82 Director of Public Prosecutions (NSW) v TH [2023] NSWCCA 81 DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 DPP (Cth) v De Le Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1 Field v R [2020] NSWCCA 105 Giles-Adam v R; Preca v R [2023] NSWCCA 122 Hall v R [2021] NSWCCA 220 Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606 Muldrock v R (2011) 244 CLR 120 NGO v R [2017] WASCA 3 Parente v R [2017] NSWCCA 284 Pham v R [2013] NSWCCA 217 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295 R v Brown [2023] NSWDC 477 R v Brown [2023] NSWDC 477 R v MAK; R v MSK (2006) 167 A Crim R 159; [2006] NSWCCA 381 RA v R [2024] NSWCCA 149 Robertson v R [2017] NSWCCA 205 Tukuafu v R [2024] NSWCCA 84
Texts Cited:	Re-Attorney General's Application under section 37 of the Crime (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Crown, Wong
Representation:	Crown: C Diebe Defence: E James
File Number(s):	2023/00284555