Regina v Quynh Van Tran [2002] NSWCCA 117

Regina v Quynh Van Tran [2002] NSWCCA 117

The sentencing judge erred in declining to fix a non-parole period on the basis given. Despite the applicant's poor history of compliance with conditions, there was plainly a need for supervised liberty after release, and it was not in the applicant's or the community's interests that he be released after serving the overall sentences without any parole supervision. The original orders were therefore quashed and new sentences with a fourteen-month non-parole period were imposed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the Parramatta District Court
Outcome
Appeal upheld; orders by Black DCJ quashed and new sentences with a non-parole period imposed.
Legal Topics
['sentence Appeal' 'non Parole Period' 'breach of Bond' 'demand Property With Menaces With Intent to Steal' 'break, Enter and Steal']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['sentence Appeal' 'non Parole Period' 'breach of Bond' 'demand Property With Menaces With Intent to Steal' 'break, Enter and Steal']

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

Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the Parramatta District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in declining to fix a non-parole period.' 'Whether the reason given for declining to set a non-parole period was an erroneous consideration.' 'Whether the applicant should have a period of supervised liberty after release from imprisonment.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred in declining to fix a non-parole period on the basis given. Despite the applicant's poor history of compliance with conditions, there was plainly a need for supervised liberty after release, and it was not in the applicant's or the community's interests that he be released after serving the overall sentences without any parole supervision. The original orders were therefore quashed and new sentences with a fourteen-month non-parole period were imposed.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld; orders by Black DCJ quashed and new sentences with a non-parole period imposed.

Orders

  • ['The orders by Black DCJ are quashed.' 'In relation to the break, enter and steal matter, the applicant is sentenced to six months imprisonment from 3 June 2001 to 2 December 2001.' 'In relation to the demand of money with menaces with intent to steal, the applicant is sentenced to a head term of eighteen months to...