Le Huynh v R [2006] NSWCCA 77

Le Huynh v R [2006] NSWCCA 77

The sentencing judge's approach indicated a failure to apply the Pearce principles because equal and fully concurrent sentences were imposed for different drug offences and the firearms sentence was fully concurrent with the first three years of the drug sentences. The eight-year sentence for deemed supply of 8.53 grams of heroin at 28 per cent purity, following an early guilty plea and without special circumstances making the offence especially objectively serious, was manifestly excessive. The sentencing miscarried generally, requiring the Court to quash the sentences and re-sentence the applicant for all offences.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 March 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence and Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence allowed; sentences quashed; applicant re-sentenced.
Legal Topics
['guilty Plea' 'supply of Prohibited Drug' 'ongoing Supply of Prohibited Drug' 'possession of Pistol Without Authorisation' 'goods in Custody' 'totality Principle' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['guilty Plea' 'supply of Prohibited Drug' 'ongoing Supply of Prohibited Drug' 'possession of Pistol Without Authorisation' 'goods in Custody' 'totality Principle' 'manifest Excess']

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 Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence and Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge failed to apply proper principles as to totality in sentencing for multiple offences.' 'Whether the sentence imposed for deemed supply of heroin was manifestly excessive.' 'Whether the sentence imposed for ongoing supply of heroin was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge's approach indicated a failure to apply the Pearce principles because equal and fully concurrent sentences were imposed for different drug offences and the firearms sentence was fully concurrent with the first three years of the drug sentences. The eight-year sentence for deemed supply of 8.53 grams of heroin at 28 per cent purity, following an early guilty plea and without special circumstances making the offence especially objectively serious, was manifestly excessive. The sentencing miscarried generally, requiring the Court to quash the sentences and re-sentence the applicant for all offences.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence allowed; sentences quashed; applicant re-sentenced.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against sentence granted.' 'Appeal against sentence allowed and the sentences imposed by Judge Shillington on 2 December 2004 quashed.' 'For the offence under s 7(1) of the Firearms Act, the applicant was sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment for three years commencing on 21 June 2004.' 'For...