Regina v Kalvin Eugene Cressel - [2017] NSWDC 272

District Court

New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: Regina v Kalvin Eugene Cressel [2017] NSWDC 272
Hearing dates: 29 September 2017
Date of orders: 06 October 2017
Decision date: 06 October 2017
Jurisdiction: Criminal
Before: Judge AC Scotting
Decision:
1 The offender is convicted.
2 For the marketable quantity offence the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for 6 years and 6 months to date from 29 April 2016 and expiring on 28 October 2022.
3 For the commercial quantity offence the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for 9 years to date from 29 April 2017 and expiring on 28 April 2026.
4 I fix a single non-parole period of 6 years and 6 months to date from 29 April 2016 and to expire on 28 October 2022.

Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – offence - plea of guilty – import commercial quantity border controlled drug – import marketable quantity of border controlled drug
SENTENCE – mitigating factors – aggravating factors – circumstances – objective seriousness – specific deterrence – general deterrence – appropriate penalty
SENTENCE PRINCIPLES – parity – totality – community values – remorse – contrition – onerous penalty – extra curial punishment – utilitarian value of pleas of guilty - willingness to facilitate the course of justice – offer of assistance to authorities - appropriate discount – contrition and remorse
DRUGS – cocaine – purity value
OTHER – gambling addiction – drug addiction
Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) ss. 16A(1), 16A(2), 17A(1)
Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) ss.307.1, 307.2
Cases Cited: Lee v R [2012] NSWCCA 123
Danial v R [2008] NSWCCA 15
Cameron v The Queen (2002) 209 CLR 339
Johnson v The Queen (2004) 78 ALJR 616
R v El Karhani (1990) 21 NSWLR 370
Category: Sentence
Parties: Regina (The Crown)
Kalvin Eugene Cressel (Offender)
Representation:
Counsel:

Solicitors:
Commonwealth Director of Pubic Prosecutions (The Crown)
Sydney Criminal Lawyers (Offender)

File Number(s): 2016/00132189
Publication restriction: None

sentence

Kalvin Eugene Cressel (the offender) appears for sentence after pleading guilty in the Local Court to one count of importing a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug (cocaine 3326.3 grams pure) contrary to section 307.1 Criminal Code (Cth) and one count of importing a marketable quantity of a border controlled drug (cocaine 1423.7 grams pure) contrary to section 307.2 Criminal Code (Cth).
The maximum penalty for the commercial quantity offence is life imprisonment and/ or a fine of $1,350,000 and the maximum penalty for the marketable quantity offence is 25 years imprisonment and/or a fine of $900,000.

Facts

The parties presented an agreed Statement of Facts that can be summarised as follows.
On 27 April 2016 an air cargo assignment consisting of multi-vitamin capsules arrived in Sydney from the United States of America. The consignee was Vanessa Tsiaras. Ms Tsiaras was friends with the offender. In March 2016 he had asked her if he could have a package sent from the USA to her address. On 4 April 2016 he asked her via Facebook if he could have a package…

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 Regina v Kalvin Eugene Cressel

Details

AGLC: Regina v Kalvin Eugene Cressel [2017] NSWDC 272
Case: [2017] NSWDC 272
Decision Date: 06 October 2017

CaseChat Overview and Summary

The case of Regina v Kalvin Eugene Cressel involved the defendant being charged with drug importation offences. Cressel pleaded guilty to importing a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug and a marketable quantity of a border controlled drug. The case was heard in the Supreme Court of Queensland. The legal issues before the court included determining the appropriate sentences for each offence, considering the objective seriousness of the offences, and assessing mitigating and aggravating factors in the sentencing process.

The court had to consider various factors in determining the sentences. These included the purity and quantity of the drugs involved, the role of the defendant in the drug importation, and the presence of any mitigating or aggravating circumstances. The court acknowledged Cressel's willingness to cooperate with authorities and his expressions of remorse as mitigating factors. However, the court also considered the objective seriousness of the offences and the need for general and specific deterrence. The court applied sentencing principles such as parity, the totality principle, and the utilitarian value of pleas of guilty, while also taking into account the community's values and the impact of the defendant's addictions on his offending behaviour.

In delivering the sentences, the court found that the appropriate penalty for the marketable quantity offence was imprisonment for 6 years and 6 months, with a non-parole period of 6 years and 6 months. For the commercial quantity offence, the court sentenced Cressel to imprisonment for 9 years, with a non-parole period of 6 years and 6 months. The court set the non-parole period to commence from the date of the marketable quantity offence sentence. The court's reasoning reflected a balanced approach, considering both the need for punishment and the potential for rehabilitation.

The final orders of the court were that Cressel was convicted of both offences, and specific sentences were imposed for each offence with corresponding non-parole periods.

Orders

Orders of the court

1 The offender is convicted.

2 For the marketable quantity offence the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for 6 years and 6 months to date from 29 April 2016 and expiring on 28 October 2022.

3 For the commercial quantity offence the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for 9 years to date from 29 April 2017 and expiring on 28 April 2026.

4 I fix a single non-parole period of 6 years and 6 months to date from 29 April 2016 and to expire on 28 October 2022.

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:	Regina v Kalvin Eugene Cressel [2017] NSWDC 272
Hearing dates:	29 September 2017
Date of orders:	06 October 2017
Decision date:	06 October 2017
Jurisdiction:	Criminal
Before:	Judge AC Scotting
Decision:	1 The offender is convicted. 2 For the marketable quantity offence the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for 6 years and 6 months to date from 29 April 2016 and expiring on 28 October 2022. 3 For the commercial quantity offence the offender is sentenced to imprisonment for 9 years to date from 29 April 2017 and expiring on 28 April 2026. 4 I fix a single non-parole period of 6 years and 6 months to date from 29 April 2016 and to expire on 28 October 2022.
Catchwords:	CRIMINAL LAW – offence - plea of guilty – import commercial quantity border controlled drug – import marketable quantity of border controlled drug SENTENCE – mitigating factors – aggravating factors – circumstances – objective seriousness – specific deterrence – general deterrence – appropriate penalty SENTENCE PRINCIPLES – parity – totality – community values – remorse – contrition – onerous penalty – extra curial punishment – utilitarian value of pleas of guilty - willingness to facilitate the course of justice – offer of assistance to authorities - appropriate discount – contrition and remorse DRUGS – cocaine – purity value OTHER – gambling addiction – drug addiction
Legislation Cited:	Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) ss. 16A(1), 16A(2), 17A(1) Criminal Code 1995 (Cth) ss.307.1, 307.2
Cases Cited:	Lee v R [2012] NSWCCA 123 Danial v R [2008] NSWCCA 15 Cameron v The Queen (2002) 209 CLR 339 Johnson v The Queen (2004) 78 ALJR 616 R v El Karhani (1990) 21 NSWLR 370
Category:	Sentence
Parties:	Regina (The Crown) Kalvin Eugene Cressel (Offender)
Representation:	Counsel: Solicitors: Commonwealth Director of Pubic Prosecutions (The Crown) Sydney Criminal Lawyers (Offender)
File Number(s):	2016/00132189
Publication restriction:	None