VOONG -v- THE QUEEN [2000] WASCA 220

Jurisdiction:	SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA	Citation No:	[2000] WASCA 220
Court:	COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL
Case No:	CCA:4/2000	Heard:	8 JUNE 2000
Coram:	KENNEDY ACJ WALLWORK J PARKER J	Delivered:	23/08/00
No of pages:	9	Judgment Part:	1 of 1
Result:	Leave to appeal against sentence granted Appeal allowedSentence reduced
PDF Version

Parties:	CHI KHAN VOONG THE QUEEN
Catchwords:	Criminal law and procedure Sentencing Possession of heroin in excess of commercial quantity reasonably suspected of having been imported into Australia Co-operation with authorities
Legislation:	Customs Act 1901 (Cth), s 233B
Case References:	Hayes v R [1981] WAR 252 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 73 ALJR 1007\t, 7 R v Duffy (1996) 85 A Crim R 456 R v Gallagher (1991) 23 NSWLR 220 Attwell v The Queen [1990] 1 WAR 540 Doherty v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 970518; 14 October 1997 Lim v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 970482; 26 September 1997 Miles v The Queen (1997) 17 WAR 518 Quach v The Queen [1999] WASCA 210 R v Bond (1997) 95 A Crim R 246 R v Cartwright (1989) 17 NSWLR 243 R v Darwell (1997) 94 A Crim R 35 R v Dinic (1997) 149 ALR 488 R v Ferrer-Esis (1991) 55 A Crim R 231 R v Foster (1992) 59 A Crim R 14 R v Golding (1980) 3 A Crim R 26 R v Greenwood, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 960277; 21 May 1996 R v Hayes (1981) 3 A Crim R 286 R v Heryadi v The Queen (1998) 98 A Crim R 578 R v Many (1990) 51 A Crim R 54 R v Salameh (1991) 55 A Crim R 384 R v Tait (1979) 46 FLR 386 "S" v The Queen [2000] WASCA 34 Stretton v The Queen, unreported; CCA SCt of WA; Library No 950282; 1 June 1995 Verschuren v The Queen (1996) 17 WAR 467

JURISDICTION : SUPREME COURT OF WESTERN AUSTRALIA TITLE OF COURT : COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CITATION : VOONG -v- THE QUEEN [2000] WASCA 220 CORAM : KENNEDY ACJ

WALLWORK J

PARKER J

HEARD : 8 JUNE 2000 DELIVERED : 23 AUGUST 2000 FILE NO/S : CCA 4 of 2000 BETWEEN : CHI KHAN VOONG

Applicant

AND

THE QUEEN

Respondent

Catchwords:

Criminal law and procedure - Sentencing - Possession of heroin in excess of commercial quantity reasonably suspected of having been imported into Australia - Co-operation with authorities

Legislation:

Customs Act 1901 (Cth), s 233B

Result:

Leave to appeal against sentence granted

Appeal allowed
Sentence reduced

(Page 2)

Representation:

Counsel:

Applicant : Ms A G Braddock

Respondent : Mr H G Dembo & Ms N L Cave

Solicitors:

Applicant : Andree Horrigan

Respondent : Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions

Case(s) referred to in judgment(s):

Hayes v R [1981] WAR 252
Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 73 ALJR 1007\t, 7
R v Duffy (1996) 85 A Crim R…

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 Voong v The Queen

Details

AGLC: Voong v The Queen [2000] WASCA 220
Case: [2000] WASCA 220
Decision Date: 23 AUGUST 2000

CaseChat Overview and Summary

In the case of Voong v The Queen, the appellant was convicted of possessing a large quantity of heroin, suspected to have been imported into Australia, and sentenced to imprisonment. The appeal was against the sentence, which the appellant argued was excessive given his cooperation with authorities and the absence of any prior convictions. The central issue before the court was whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive in light of the appellant's cooperation and the principles of sentencing in criminal law.

The court reviewed the appellant's level of cooperation, which included providing information that led to the arrest of another individual and the seizure of a significant amount of heroin. The court also considered the statutory guidelines and case law on sentencing for drug offences, particularly those involving importation. The court found that the sentence imposed did not adequately reflect the appellant's cooperation and was therefore manifestly excessive. It was noted that the appellant's cooperation was substantial and led to significant law enforcement outcomes, which should have been given substantial weight in the sentencing process.

Accordingly, the appeal was allowed, and the sentence was reduced. The court granted leave to appeal against the sentence and ordered a reduction in the term of imprisonment imposed on the appellant, reflecting his significant cooperation with authorities and the absence of prior convictions.

Orders

Orders of the court

Leave to appeal against sentence granted

Appeal allowedSentence reduced

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.