R v Ma; R v Zheng [2020] NSWDC 862

R v Ma; R v Zheng [2020] NSWDC 862

Both offenders knowingly took part in sophisticated indoor hydroponic cultivation of cannabis in excess of a large commercial quantity. Their offending fell between the low range and the mid-range of objective seriousness. Although their roles and subjective circumstances differed, both had no relevant criminal history, pleaded guilty, showed remorse, had good or reasonable prospects of rehabilitation and were unlikely to reoffend. Balancing the objective and subjective circumstances, and applying parity, the Court imposed the same sentence on each offender: imprisonment for 3 years with a non-parole period of 18 months, after a 25% discount for the guilty pleas and with special...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
16 December 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing / Sentence Following Pleas of Guilty
Outcome
Each offender was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years with a non-parole period of 18 months; special circumstances were found and the back-up offences were withdrawn.
Legal Topics
['cultivation of Prohibited Plants' 'large Commercial Quantity' 'plea of Guilty' 'objective Seriousness' 'parity Between Co Offenders' 'special Circumstances' 'rehabilitation and Remorse' 'general Deterrence' 'sentencing Statistics']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['cultivation of Prohibited Plants' 'large Commercial Quantity' 'plea of Guilty' 'objective Seriousness' 'parity Between Co Offenders' 'special Circumstances' 'rehabilitation and Remorse' 'general Deterrence' 'sentencing Statistics']

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 / Sentence Following Pleas of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed on each offender for knowingly taking part in cultivating a prohibited plant in excess of a large commercial quantity contrary to s 23(2)(a) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985.' 'Whether the objective seriousness and moral culpability of Ma and Zheng were roughly equivalent so that parity required the same sentence.' "What weight should be given to each offender's guilty plea, remorse, prospects of rehabilitation, lack of relevant criminal history and other subjective circumstances." 'Whether special circumstances should be found for each offender.']

Ratio Decidendi

Both offenders knowingly took part in sophisticated indoor hydroponic cultivation of cannabis in excess of a large commercial quantity. Their offending fell between the low range and the mid-range of objective seriousness. Although their roles and subjective circumstances differed, both had no relevant criminal history, pleaded guilty, showed remorse, had good or reasonable prospects of rehabilitation and were unlikely to reoffend. Balancing the objective and subjective circumstances, and applying parity, the Court imposed the same sentence on each offender: imprisonment for 3 years with a non-parole period of 18 months, after a 25% discount for the guilty pleas and with special...

Court Disposition

Each offender was convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 3 years with a non-parole period of 18 months; special circumstances were found and the back-up offences were withdrawn.

Orders

  • ['Zheng: The offender is convicted of the offence.' 'Zheng: Taking into account a discount of 25% for the plea of guilty, a sentence of imprisonment of 3 years is imposed, to commence on 17 December 2019.' 'Zheng: A non-parole period of 18 months is imposed, expiring on 16 June 2021.' 'Zheng: Special circumstances...