The Queen v Singh [2020] NSWDC 665

The Queen v Singh [2020] NSWDC 665

The offender's two heroin supply offences were slightly above the mid-range of objective seriousness because he offended while on conditional liberty, supplied 28 grams and 56 grams of heroin, and acted as an up-line supplier to a street level dealer. His prior convictions did not aggravate objective seriousness but deprived him of leniency and increased the significance of deterrence and community protection. Despite a relatively strong subjective case involving addiction, depression, limited contrition and guarded rehabilitation prospects, the statutory threshold for imprisonment was met and only full-time custody was reasonable. Special circumstances justified a longer parole period,...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 August 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence After Trial for Two Counts of Supply Prohibited Drug / Sentence Following Jury Verdicts of Guilty
Outcome
The offender was convicted and sentenced to full-time custody by way of an aggregate sentence of 5 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 3 years.
Legal Topics
['supply of Prohibited Drug' 'heroin' 'co Offender Parity' 'objective Seriousness' 'conditional Liberty' 'rehabilitation' 'full Time Custody' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['supply of Prohibited Drug' 'heroin' 'co Offender Parity' 'objective Seriousness' 'conditional Liberty' 'rehabilitation' 'full Time Custody' '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 After Trial for Two Counts of Supply Prohibited Drug / Sentence Following Jury Verdicts of Guilty

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['What sentence should be imposed for two counts of supplying heroin contrary to s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 NSW.' 'Whether the objective seriousness of the offending was above the mid-range for offences of this type.' "How the offender's prior convictions, conditional liberty, role as an up-line supplier, subjective circumstances, remorse, rehabilitation prospects and co-offender sentence should affect sentence." 'Whether no sentence other than full-time imprisonment was reasonable and whether special circumstances justified a longer than usual parole period.']

Ratio Decidendi

The offender's two heroin supply offences were slightly above the mid-range of objective seriousness because he offended while on conditional liberty, supplied 28 grams and 56 grams of heroin, and acted as an up-line supplier to a street level dealer. His prior convictions did not aggravate objective seriousness but deprived him of leniency and increased the significance of deterrence and community protection. Despite a relatively strong subjective case involving addiction, depression, limited contrition and guarded rehabilitation prospects, the statutory threshold for imprisonment was met and only full-time custody was reasonable. Special circumstances justified a longer parole period,...

Court Disposition

The offender was convicted and sentenced to full-time custody by way of an aggregate sentence of 5 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 3 years.

Orders

  • ['Gurinder Singh is convicted of supplying a prohibited drug, namely 28 grams of heroin, in breach of s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985.' 'Gurinder Singh is convicted of supplying a prohibited drug, namely 56 grams of heroin, in breach of s 25(1) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985.' 'An...