R v Jin [2011] NSWSC 169

R v Jin [2011] NSWSC 169

The offender's conduct consisted of unplanned provision of safe accommodation for about two weeks to two men whom the jury found he knew or believed had committed two murders. Although the offence is serious because it assists murderers after the fact, there were no aggravating factors, the offender had no prior convictions, was of prior good character, had low risk of reoffending, was influenced to some extent by Hoang Huy Nguyen, and his offending was towards the lower end of the range. Full-time custody was required, but concurrency for paired offences and limited accumulation between assistance provided to the two murderers produced an aggregate non-parole period of 15 months, with...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Four Offences of Being an Accessory After the Fact to Murder / Sentence After Jury Verdicts of Guilty
Outcome
Jian Jin was sentenced to imprisonment for each of the four offences, with paired sentences concurrent and three months accumulation between the sentences relating to assistance provided to Hoang Huy Nguyen and Minh Duc Luong; the earliest eligibility for release to parole was 15 February 2012.
Legal Topics
['accessory After the Fact to Murder' 'murder' 'objective Seriousness' 'mitigating Factors' 'prior Good Character' 'concurrency and Accumulation' 'totality' 'non Parole Period' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['accessory After the Fact to Murder' 'murder' 'objective Seriousness' 'mitigating Factors' 'prior Good Character' 'concurrency and Accumulation' 'totality' 'non Parole Period' 'special Circumstances']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentencing for Four Offences of Being an Accessory After the Fact to Murder / Sentence After Jury Verdicts of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for four offences of being an accessory after the fact to murder where the offender provided safe accommodation to two murderers for about two weeks after the murders.' 'Whether the offender knew or believed at the time he provided accommodation that the murders had been committed and that Hoang Huy Nguyen and Minh Duc Luong were responsible.' 'How to assess objective seriousness, mitigating factors, concurrency, accumulation, totality and special circumstances in fixing the sentences and non-parole periods.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender's conduct consisted of unplanned provision of safe accommodation for about two weeks to two men whom the jury found he knew or believed had committed two murders. Although the offence is serious because it assists murderers after the fact, there were no aggravating factors, the offender had no prior convictions, was of prior good character, had low risk of reoffending, was influenced to some extent by Hoang Huy Nguyen, and his offending was towards the lower end of the range. Full-time custody was required, but concurrency for paired offences and limited accumulation between assistance provided to the two murderers produced an aggregate non-parole period of 15 months, with...

Court Disposition

Jian Jin was sentenced to imprisonment for each of the four offences, with paired sentences concurrent and three months accumulation between the sentences relating to assistance provided to Hoang Huy Nguyen and Minh Duc Luong; the earliest eligibility for release to parole was 15 February 2012.

Orders

  • ['For being an accessory after the fact to the murder of Phuc Uy Nguyen by Hoang Huy Nguyen, sentenced to imprisonment with a non-parole period of 12 months commencing on 16 November 2010 and expiring on 15 November 2011 and a balance of term of 12 months expiring on 15 November 2012.' 'For being an accessory after...