Regina v Mascaro-Varillas [2002] NSWCCA 524

Regina v Mascaro-Varillas [2002] NSWCCA 524

The head sentence of 15 years was correct because the applicant was a principal in the importation of a commercial quantity of cocaine and the sentence reflected an appropriate allowance for s.16G and the guilty plea. However, the non-parole period of 11 years, about 73 per cent of the head sentence, was excessive because the offence was not in the worst category of its kind; it was reduced to 10 years.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against the head sentence dismissed; appeal against the non-parole period allowed and a non-parole period of 10 years substituted.
Legal Topics
['cocaine Importation' 'commercial Quantity of Narcotic Goods' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'non Parole Period' 'commonwealth Sentencing' 'section 16 G Remissions']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['cocaine Importation' 'commercial Quantity of Narcotic Goods' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'non Parole Period' 'commonwealth Sentencing' 'section 16 G Remissions']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the discount for the guilty plea and contrition by referring to the strength of the Crown case and utilitarian value of the plea.' 'Whether the applicant had provided assistance to authorities warranting a sentencing discount.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erroneously applied the guideline judgment in R v Wong & Leung to a Commonwealth offence and to a principal in the importation.' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to take into account s.16G of the Crimes Act 1914.' 'Whether the non-parole period of 11 years was excessive in relation to the 15 year head sentence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The head sentence of 15 years was correct because the applicant was a principal in the importation of a commercial quantity of cocaine and the sentence reflected an appropriate allowance for s.16G and the guilty plea. However, the non-parole period of 11 years, about 73 per cent of the head sentence, was excessive because the offence was not in the worst category of its kind; it was reduced to 10 years.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against the head sentence dismissed; appeal against the non-parole period allowed and a non-parole period of 10 years substituted.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against sentence granted.' 'Dismiss the appeal against the head sentence of imprisonment for 15 years commencing on 3 August 1999.' 'Allow the appeal against the non-parole period of 11 years and in lieu thereof substitute a non-parole period of 10 years commencing on 3 August 1999 and expiring on...