Nguyen v R [2023] NSWCCA 240

Nguyen v R [2023] NSWCCA 240

There was no error in the sentencing judge's assessment of the applicant's objective seriousness or in the handling of the parity principle; the judge's conclusions and sentence were within discretion. Any clerical error in the recognisance order under s 19AHA of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) must be corrected by the sentencing court, not the appellate court.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 October 2023
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Sentence / Leave to Appeal and Determination of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'money Laundering' 'recklessly Dealing in Proceeds of Crime' 'sentencing Discretion' 'parity Principle' 'correction of Clerical Errors in Sentencing']

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

Appeal Against Sentence / Leave to Appeal and Determination of Appeal

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the objective gravity of the offence by relying on prior attendance at the premises.' "Whether the applicant had a justifiable sense of grievance in light of the co-offender's sentence." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in varying the sentencing order under s 19AHA, Crimes Act 1914 (Cth).']

Ratio Decidendi

There was no error in the sentencing judge's assessment of the applicant's objective seriousness or in the handling of the parity principle; the judge's conclusions and sentence were within discretion. Any clerical error in the recognisance order under s 19AHA of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) must be corrected by the sentencing court, not the appellate court.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

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