Regina v Khanh Hung Vu [2005] NSWSC 271

Regina v Khanh Hung Vu [2005] NSWSC 271

The offender committed murder by a vicious and sustained beating of the deceased, with no intent to kill but with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. His criminality was aggravated because he was at conditional liberty and subject to an Apprehended Violence Order, and because the fatal attack followed previous vicious assaults and a prior serious assault conviction. His guilty pleas had only modest utilitarian value and were not evidence of contrition. The standard non-parole period for murder did not apply, and the appropriate sentence was imprisonment for eighteen years with a non-parole period of thirteen years and six months.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing for Murder / Sentence After Guilty Plea During Trial
Outcome
The offender was sentenced to imprisonment for eighteen years with a non-parole period of thirteen years and six months.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'domestic Violence' 'guilty Plea' 'non Parole Period' 'aggravating Factors' 'apprehended Violence Order']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['murder' 'domestic Violence' 'guilty Plea' 'non Parole Period' 'aggravating Factors' 'apprehended Violence 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 Sentencing for Murder / Sentence After Guilty Plea During Trial

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["What sentence should be imposed for the offender's murder of Yong Ling." "Whether the offender's criminality was aggravated by being at conditional liberty and bound by an Apprehended Violence Order when he attacked the deceased." "Whether the offender's prior violence against the deceased and previous serious assault disentitled him to leniency." "What allowance should be made for the offender's pleas of guilty and their utilitarian value." 'Whether there was premeditation or absence of planning affecting sentence.' 'Whether the standard non-parole period for murder applied in the circumstances.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender committed murder by a vicious and sustained beating of the deceased, with no intent to kill but with intent to cause grievous bodily harm. His criminality was aggravated because he was at conditional liberty and subject to an Apprehended Violence Order, and because the fatal attack followed previous vicious assaults and a prior serious assault conviction. His guilty pleas had only modest utilitarian value and were not evidence of contrition. The standard non-parole period for murder did not apply, and the appropriate sentence was imprisonment for eighteen years with a non-parole period of thirteen years and six months.

Court Disposition

The offender was sentenced to imprisonment for eighteen years with a non-parole period of thirteen years and six months.

Orders

  • ['The offender is sentenced to imprisonment for a period of eighteen years.' 'A non-parole period of thirteen years and six months is fixed commencing on 23 July 2003 and expiring on 22 January 2017.' 'A balance of the term of four years and six months expires on 22 July 2021.' 'The offender will be eligible for...