R v Hoang [2006] NSWDC 185

R v Hoang [2006] NSWDC 185

The offence required imprisonment because the offender deliberately imported a marketable quantity of heroin, but the court accepted on the balance of probabilities that he did so at the behest of others for personal profit rather than as an independently financed principal. Taking into account the seriousness of importing 86.4 grams of pure heroin, the need for deterrence and punishment, the plea of guilty at the first reasonable opportunity, lack of prior convictions, subjective hardship, health and psychological issues, vulnerability in custody and positive prospects of rehabilitation, the appropriate sentence was 6 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 3 years and 4 months.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 November 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Importing a Marketable Quantity of a Border Controlled Drug, Namely Heroin / Sentence After Plea of Guilty
Outcome
Offender convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 6 years with a non-parole period of 3 years and 4 months.
Legal Topics
['importation of Heroin' 'marketable Quantity of Border Controlled Drug' 'commonwealth Sentencing' 'plea of Guilty' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['importation of Heroin' 'marketable Quantity of Border Controlled Drug' 'commonwealth Sentencing' 'plea of Guilty' 'non Parole Period']

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 Importing a Marketable Quantity of a Border Controlled Drug, Namely Heroin / Sentence After Plea of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for importing 86.4 grams of pure heroin contrary to s 307.2(1) Criminal Code (Cth).' 'Whether the offender had established that he imported the heroin at the behest of others for personal profit rather than as a principal in his own right.' "What allowance should be made for the offender's plea of guilty, subjective circumstances, prospects of rehabilitation, health and vulnerability in custody." 'What non-parole period should be fixed under the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

The offence required imprisonment because the offender deliberately imported a marketable quantity of heroin, but the court accepted on the balance of probabilities that he did so at the behest of others for personal profit rather than as an independently financed principal. Taking into account the seriousness of importing 86.4 grams of pure heroin, the need for deterrence and punishment, the plea of guilty at the first reasonable opportunity, lack of prior convictions, subjective hardship, health and psychological issues, vulnerability in custody and positive prospects of rehabilitation, the appropriate sentence was 6 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 3 years and 4 months.

Court Disposition

Offender convicted and sentenced to imprisonment for 6 years with a non-parole period of 3 years and 4 months.

Orders

  • ['Thanh Hung Hoang is convicted of the offence to which he pleaded guilty.' 'The offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 6 years commencing on 10 July 2006 and expiring on 9 July 2012.' 'A non-parole period of 3 years and 4 months is fixed, commencing on 10 July 2006 and expiring on 9 November 2009.' "The...