R v PAREDES, R v BARILLARO, R v DONEVSKI [2011] NSWDC 48

R v PAREDES, R v BARILLARO, R v DONEVSKI [2011] NSWDC 48

All three offenders, having pleaded guilty to supply of a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine, are to be sentenced slightly below the midpoint of the mid-range of objective seriousness, with the standard non-parole period used as a guide but not applied automatically. The Court found insufficient evidence for claims of duress or coercion, and determined each had significant involvement in the offence. Special circumstances, including health and prior good character, justified some reduction, and a discount of one-sixth is allowed for the plea. Each offender receives a substantial sentence reflecting the seriousness of the crime, individual circumstances, and statutory factors.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing After Guilty Plea
Outcome
Conviction and sentence imposed; all offenders receive custodial sentences with specific non-parole periods and total terms set out.
Legal Topics
['supply of Prohibited Drug' 'sentencing Principles' 'objective and Subjective Seriousness' 'discount for Guilty Plea']
['criminal Law'] ['supply of Prohibited Drug' 'sentencing Principles' 'objective and Subjective Seriousness' 'discount for Guilty Plea']

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 After Guilty Plea

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Assessment of objective and subjective seriousness in sentencing for supply of commercial quantity of methylamphetamine' 'Appropriate discount for guilty plea in drug offences' 'Determination of individual roles and culpability among co-offenders']

Ratio Decidendi

All three offenders, having pleaded guilty to supply of a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine, are to be sentenced slightly below the midpoint of the mid-range of objective seriousness, with the standard non-parole period used as a guide but not applied automatically. The Court found insufficient evidence for claims of duress or coercion, and determined each had significant involvement in the offence. Special circumstances, including health and prior good character, justified some reduction, and a discount of one-sixth is allowed for the plea. Each offender receives a substantial sentence reflecting the seriousness of the crime, individual circumstances, and statutory factors.

Court Disposition

Conviction and sentence imposed; all offenders receive custodial sentences with specific non-parole periods and total terms set out.

Orders

  • ['Jaime Paredes: Convicted; sentenced to 4 years and 6 months non-parole period from 27 March 2008; eligible for parole from 26 September 2012; total term 7 years expiring 26 September 2015.' 'Mome Donevski: Convicted; sentenced to 4 years non-parole from 27 March 2008; eligible for parole from 26 March 2012; total...