R v Mark Brett Lewis [2018] NSWDC 509

R v Mark Brett Lewis [2018] NSWDC 509

The offender was convicted by the jury of participating in a joint criminal enterprise to manufacture a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine. The sentencing judge accepted that his role was that of a worker rather than an overseer or principal, but found that he procured the use of Stewart's property, knew of the cook-up, brought equipment used in the manufacture, participated by crushing material, assisted in removing the injured Tsimingos, and later sought to conceal evidence by having the council utility cleaned. Parity with Tsimingos, who received a 25% guilty plea discount and a nine-year head sentence despite extra-curial punishment from serious injuries, required a...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentence After Jury Conviction
Outcome
The offender was sentenced to imprisonment for a total term of 12 years, with a non-parole period of nine years commencing on 1 May 2018 and expiring on 30 April 2027, and a further term of three years expiring on 30 April 2030.
Legal Topics
['manufacture of Large Commercial Quantity of Methylamphetamine' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'parity With Co Offender' 'objective Seriousness' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['manufacture of Large Commercial Quantity of Methylamphetamine' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'parity With Co Offender' 'objective Seriousness' 'standard 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 Sentence / Sentence After Jury Conviction

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What facts and role should be found for sentence after the offender was convicted by a jury of manufacturing a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine.' 'Whether the offender should be sentenced consistently with parity principles having regard to the sentence imposed on co-offender Bill Tsimingos, who pleaded guilty.' "Whether the offender's personal circumstances, prior good character, absence of remorse, and family circumstances mitigated sentence." 'Whether special circumstances justified departure from the statutory ratio between the non-parole period and the balance of sentence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender was convicted by the jury of participating in a joint criminal enterprise to manufacture a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine. The sentencing judge accepted that his role was that of a worker rather than an overseer or principal, but found that he procured the use of Stewart's property, knew of the cook-up, brought equipment used in the manufacture, participated by crushing material, assisted in removing the injured Tsimingos, and later sought to conceal evidence by having the council utility cleaned. Parity with Tsimingos, who received a 25% guilty plea discount and a nine-year head sentence despite extra-curial punishment from serious injuries, required a...

Court Disposition

The offender was sentenced to imprisonment for a total term of 12 years, with a non-parole period of nine years commencing on 1 May 2018 and expiring on 30 April 2027, and a further term of three years expiring on 30 April 2030.

Orders

  • ['Non-parole period of nine years commencing on 1 May 2018 and expiring on 30 April 2027.' 'Further period of imprisonment of three years to commence upon the expiration of the non-parole period and expiring on 30 April 2030.' 'Total sentence of 12 years imprisonment comprising the non-parole period and the balance...