R v Keith Francis Silvia [2020] NSWDC 388

R v Keith Francis Silvia [2020] NSWDC 388

Although the offences involved serious drug supply activity and dealing with proceeds of crime, the offender's role was minor and facilitative, his objective criminality was low, he received a 25% guilty plea discount, he had genuine remorse, insight, health problems, family and community support, low risk of reoffending if abstinent, and rehabilitative progress that would likely be undermined by full-time custody. Applying parity, totality and the purposes of sentencing, an aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months served by way of an intensive correction order was the appropriate sentence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 July 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence / Sentencing After Guilty Plea
Outcome
The offender was convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months, to be served by way of an intensive correction order.
Legal Topics
['money Laundering' 'dealing With Money Suspected of Being Proceeds of Crime' 'supply Prohibited Drug' 'commercial Quantity' 'indictable Quantity' 'intensive Correction Order']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['money Laundering' 'dealing With Money Suspected of Being Proceeds of Crime' 'supply Prohibited Drug' 'commercial Quantity' 'indictable Quantity' 'intensive Correction Order']

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 / Sentencing After Guilty Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentences should be imposed for knowingly taking part in the supply of prohibited drugs and dealing with property proceeds of crime.' 'Whether the objective seriousness, parity, totality, guilty plea, health, remorse, rehabilitation prospects and COVID-19 conditions justified an intensive correction order rather than full-time custody.' 'How the standard non-parole period for the s 25(2) Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) offence should be taken into account.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the offences involved serious drug supply activity and dealing with proceeds of crime, the offender's role was minor and facilitative, his objective criminality was low, he received a 25% guilty plea discount, he had genuine remorse, insight, health problems, family and community support, low risk of reoffending if abstinent, and rehabilitative progress that would likely be undermined by full-time custody. Applying parity, totality and the purposes of sentencing, an aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months served by way of an intensive correction order was the appropriate sentence.

Court Disposition

The offender was convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 2 years and 6 months, to be served by way of an intensive correction order.

Orders

  • ['Keith Francis Silvia was convicted for the offences charged under section 25(2) and section 25(1) of the Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) and s 193C(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).' 'The offender was sentenced to a term of imprisonment of 2 1/2 years, dating from 24 July 2020 and expiring on 23 January...