Nguyen v R [2020] NSWCCA 281

Nguyen v R [2020] NSWCCA 281

Mr Nguyen did not have a legitimate sense of grievance arising from the difference between his sentence and Mr Vilaysack's sentence because the sentencing judge considered the relevant parity material, gave reasons for differentiating the sentences, and was entitled to regard Mr Nguyen's offending as more serious given his role as principal of his own distribution team, his ongoing supply offending, the Form 1 criminal group offence, and the different offences and maximum penalties faced by Mr Vilaysack.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 November 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['parity Principle' 'justifiable Sense of Grievance' 'ongoing Supply of Prohibited Drug' 'criminal Group Offending' 'intensive Correction Order']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['parity Principle' 'justifiable Sense of Grievance' 'ongoing Supply of Prohibited Drug' 'criminal Group Offending' 'intensive Correction 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 Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence imposed on John Nguyen was unjustifiably disparate from the sentence imposed on Jimmy Vilaysack so as to produce a legitimate sense of grievance.' "Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to take into account an available factual consideration concerning Jimmy Vilaysack's alleged involvement in a larger drug network."]

Ratio Decidendi

Mr Nguyen did not have a legitimate sense of grievance arising from the difference between his sentence and Mr Vilaysack's sentence because the sentencing judge considered the relevant parity material, gave reasons for differentiating the sentences, and was entitled to regard Mr Nguyen's offending as more serious given his role as principal of his own distribution team, his ongoing supply offending, the Form 1 criminal group offence, and the different offences and maximum penalties faced by Mr Vilaysack.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal against sentence.' 'Dismiss the appeal.']