Legal Research
Cases
Ramos v R

Ramos v R

Case [2018] NSWCCA 206 26 September 2018

Criminal Liability

Sentencing

Criminal Law

No judgment structure available for this case.

Type to search within this case.

Court of Criminal Appeal

Supreme Court

New South Wales

Summary available

Medium Neutral Citation: Ramos v R [2018] NSWCCA 206
Hearing dates: 7 September 2018
Date of orders: 26 September 2018
Decision date: 26 September 2018
Before: Ward CJ in Eq at [1];
Bellew J at [2];
Beech-Jones J at [3]
Decision:
(1) Leave to appeal against the sentence imposed by the District Court on 23 September 2016 for an offence under s 193B(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 be granted;

(2) The appeal be allowed;

(3) In lieu thereof, the appellant be sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 13 months commencing 22 February 2015 and expiring 21 March 2016 with a non-parole period of 9 months commencing 22 February 2015 and expiring 21 November 2015;
(4) Pursuant to s 7(1A) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 the sentence imposed on 23 September 2016 for an offence under s 307.8(1) of the Criminal Code (Cth) be varied so that that sentence of imprisonment for 6 years will commence on 22 November 2015 and expire on 21 November 2021 and the non-parole period of 4 years will expire on 21 November 2019.
Catchwords: SENTENCING – dealing with Proceeds of Crimes – Crimes Act – s 193B(2) – possession of $12,900 – admission one-third derived from drug sales – finding offence “above the middle of any scale constructed for such offences” – little known about offence – finding not open – error – sentencing discretion re-exercised
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 193B
Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 7
Criminal Code 1995 (Cth), s 307.8
Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 44
Cases Cited: Betts v The Queen (2016) 258 CLR 420; [2016] HCA 25
Burns v R [2010] NSWCCA 279
Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37
Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282
Pearce v R (1998) 194 CLR 610; [1998] HCA 57
R v Campbell [2014] NSWCCA 102
Smaragdis v R [2010] NSWCCA 276
Category: Principal judgment
Parties: Cristian Mosso Ramos (Applicant)
Regina (Crown)
Representation:
Counsel:
T Quilter (Applicant)
L Crowley (Crown)
Solicitors:
Legal Aid NSW (Applicant)
Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Crown)

File Number(s): 2015/55175
Decision under appeal

Court or tribunal:

District Court

Jurisdiction:

Criminal

Date of Decision:

23 September 2016

Before:

McLoughlin DCJ

File Number(s):

2015/55175

Judgment

WARD CJ in EQ: I agree with Beech-Jones J.
BELLEW J: I agree with Beech-Jones J.
BEECH-JONES J: This is an application for leave to appeal against a sentence of imprisonment imposed by the District Court for the offence of dealing with proceeds of crime knowing that it was the proceeds of crime contrary to s 193B(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW). At the time the applicant received that sentence he was also sentenced for a serious drug offence.
On 10 June 2016, the applicant was arraigned in the District Court on an indictment that charged him with two offences. He pleaded guilty to both. The first count…

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 Ramos v R

Details

AGLC: Ramos v The Queen [2018] NSWCCA 206
Case: [2018] NSWCCA 206
Decision Date: 26 September 2018

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Ramos v R involved the sentencing of the appellant following his conviction for possession of $12,900, which he admitted was one-third derived from drug sales. The matter was heard in the High Court of Australia. The appellant was sentenced under the Crimes Act, specifically section 193B(2), which requires the court to consider the seriousness of the offence in determining the appropriate sentence. The key issue before the court was whether the primary judge was correct in finding the offence was "above the middle of any scale constructed for such offences," given the limited information available about the severity of drug-related offences.

The court held that the primary judge's finding was not open due to the error in assessing the seriousness of the offence. The court reasoned that the appellant's limited knowledge of the offence made it inappropriate to conclude that the offence was at the upper end of the scale for such crimes. The High Court re-exercised its sentencing discretion, considering the available information and the nature of the offence, to determine a more appropriate sentence for the appellant.

Given the court's re-exercise of sentencing discretion, the final orders of the court were not explicitly detailed in the provided text. However, it is clear that the High Court considered the appellant's limited knowledge of the offence and the need for a more accurate assessment of the offence's seriousness when determining the appropriate sentence. The court's decision underscores the importance of a thorough evaluation of the facts and the relevant legal principles in sentencing matters involving drug-related offences.

Orders