R v Dao [2023] NSWDC 351

R v Dao [2023] NSWDC 351

The only appropriate punishment for supply of prohibited drug in commercial quantity, considering aggravating factors and offender’s circumstances, is a fixed term of imprisonment of two years, to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order with specified conditions due to rehabilitation prospects and community safety.

Parties
Prosecution: Rex (Crown); Offender: Tri Huu Dao
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
31 August 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentencing
Outcome
Offender convicted and sentenced to two years imprisonment, served by Intensive Corrections Order
Legal Topics
Supply of Prohibited Drugs, Sentencing, Intensive Corrections Order, Breach of ICO, Time in Custody, Aggravating and Mitigating Factors

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 6 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 6
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex (Crown)

Prosecution

Tri Huu Dao

Offender

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentencing

  1. 1 Appropriate sentence for supply of prohibited drug in commercial quantity
  2. 2 Consideration of related offences on Form 1
  3. 3 Assessment of aggravating and mitigating factors

Ratio Decidendi

The only appropriate punishment for supply of prohibited drug in commercial quantity, considering aggravating factors and offender’s circumstances, is a fixed term of imprisonment of two years, to be served by way of an Intensive Corrections Order with specified conditions due to rehabilitation prospects and community safety.

Court Disposition

Offender convicted and sentenced to two years imprisonment, served by Intensive Corrections Order

Orders

  • Conviction for supply prohibited drug indictable and commercial quantity (sequence 9); related offences on Form 1 taken into account
  • Sentence: two years imprisonment, commencing 31 August 2023