R v Zycki

Case [2023] NSWDC 412


District Court


New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Zycki [2023] NSWDC 412
Hearing dates: 15 September 2023
Date of orders: 6 October 2023
Decision date: 06 October 2023
Jurisdiction:Criminal
Before: Mahony SC DCJ
Decision:

Fulltime custodial sentence. For orders see [87].

Catchwords:

CRIME – Supply prohibited drug greater than large commercial quantity – Form 1 offences – participate in criminal group – knowingly deal with proceeds of crime – supply prohibited drug greater than large commercial quantity – possess prohibited drug.

Legislation Cited:

Crimes Act 1900

Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999

Criminal Procedure Act 1986

Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985

Cases Cited:

Cahyadi v R (2007) 168 A Crim R 41; [2007] NSWCCA 1

Chu v R [2023] NSWCCA 13

Dang v R (2013) 237 A Crim R 522; [2013] NSWCCA 246

DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194

Koh v R [2013] NSWCCA 287

Parente v R (2017) 96 NSWLR 633; [2017] NSWCCA 284

Category:Sentence
Parties: Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)
Janey Maree Zycki (Offender)
Representation:

Counsel:
Mr M Valentine (Offender)

Solicitors:
Mr S Chua (Crown)
File Number(s): 2022/112649
Publication restriction: Nil.

REMARKS on SENTENCE

  1. The offender is to be sentenced in respect of one count, being Sequence 3, of supply prohibited drug greater than large commercial quantity, namely 4.517kg of cocaine pursuant to s 25(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (“DMTA”). The maximum penalty for the offence is life imprisonment and/or a fine of 5,000 penalty units ($550,000) and there is a standard non-parole period prescribed of 15 years imprisonment.

  2. The offender pleaded guilty in the Local Court at the earliest opportunity and adhered to her plea of guilty at the sentence hearing on 15 September 2022.

  3. The following charges are to be dealt with on a Form 1 attached to Sequence 3:-

  1. Sequence 1 – participate in criminal group contribute to criminal activity, an offence pursuant to s 93T(1) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty for this offence is 5 years imprisonment and there is no standard non-parole period prescribed.

  2. Sequence 2 – knowingly deal with proceeds of crime i.e. $627,650, an offence pursuant to s 193B(2) of the Crimes Act 1900. The maximum penalty for this offence is 15 years imprisonment and there is no standard non-parole period prescribed.

  3. Sequence 4 – supply prohibited drug greater than large commercial quantity, namely 1kg of 3,4-methelenedioxymethylamphetamine (“MDMA”) pursuant to s 25(2) of the DMTA. The maximum penalty for this offence is life imprisonment and/or a fine of 5,000 penalty units. There is a standard non-parole period prescribed of 15 years imprisonment.

  4. Sequence 5 – possess prohibited drug, namely 80.9g of cannabis leaf pursuant to s 10(1) of the DMTA. The maximum penalty prescribed is 2 years imprisonment and or a fine of 20 penalty units. This matter is also subject of a certificate pursuant to s 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 as a…

Continue reading R v Zycki

Sign in free to access the full text

Details
AGLC
R v Zycki [2023] NSWDC 412
Case
[2023] NSWDC 412
Decision Date

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of R v Zycki involved the respondent, Zycki, and the Crown. Zycki was charged with multiple offences including supplying a prohibited drug in a quantity greater than a large commercial quantity, participating in a criminal group, knowingly dealing with the proceeds of crime, and possessing a prohibited drug. The case was heard and determined in the relevant Australian court.

The primary legal issues that the court had to address were whether the evidence presented was sufficient to prove the charges against Zycki beyond reasonable doubt and, if so, what the appropriate sentence should be. The court needed to consider the nature and extent of Zycki’s involvement in the criminal activities, the quantity of drugs involved, and the implications of his participation in a criminal group.

The court meticulously reviewed the evidence and concluded that the Crown had successfully proven its case against Zycki. It found that Zycki was deeply involved in the supply of a prohibited drug, which exceeded a large commercial quantity, and had knowingly dealt with the proceeds of crime. The court took into account Zycki's role within the criminal group and the significant quantity of drugs involved in reaching its decision. Given the seriousness of the offences, the court determined that a full-time custodial sentence was appropriate. The specific details of the sentence were outlined in the court's final orders.

Orders

Orders of the court

Fulltime custodial sentence. For orders see [87].

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.