Regina v Minh Duong [1999] NSWCCA 448

Regina v Minh Duong [1999] NSWCCA 448

The appeal succeeded because the sentencing judge failed to apply the applicable principles for serious professional receiving, did not adequately account for the respondent committing five offences while on bail, wrongly treated improvident investment of stolen property as mitigating, and found exceptional circumstances where none existed; despite the respondent's guilty pleas and lack of prior convictions, the community service sentences were inadequate and custodial sentences were required.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 December 1999
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Inadequacy of Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentences imposed in the Court below quashed and custodial sentences imposed.
Legal Topics
['receiving Stolen Goods' 'crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'leniency' 'community Service' 'imprisonment' 'parole']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['receiving Stolen Goods' 'crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'leniency' 'community Service' 'imprisonment' 'parole']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Crown Appeal Against Inadequacy of Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences of community service imposed for ten charges of receiving were inadequate or too lenient.' "Whether the respondent's offending as a receiver, including offences committed while on bail and the value and scale of the stolen goods, required substantial custodial sentences."]

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal succeeded because the sentencing judge failed to apply the applicable principles for serious professional receiving, did not adequately account for the respondent committing five offences while on bail, wrongly treated improvident investment of stolen property as mitigating, and found exceptional circumstances where none existed; despite the respondent's guilty pleas and lack of prior convictions, the community service sentences were inadequate and custodial sentences were required.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentences imposed in the Court below quashed and custodial sentences imposed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal allowed.' 'Sentences imposed in the Court below quashed.' 'Count 1: fixed term of imprisonment of two years 11 months to commence on 8 December 1999 and to expire on 7 November 2002.' 'Count 6: minimum term of imprisonment of 1 month to commence on 8 November 2002 and to expire on 7 December 2002, with an...