Huynh v R [2009] NSWCCA 65

Huynh v R [2009] NSWCCA 65

The trial judge properly applied the law on circumstantial evidence, admitted relevant expert evidence within its permitted scope, did not err in findings or sentencing, and no grounds for reducing the sentence or setting aside conviction were demonstrated.

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Applicant: The Thu HUYNH; Respondent/crown: REGINA
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 March 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Appeals dismissed
Legal Topics
Supply of Prohibited Drug, Circumstantial Evidence, Sentencing, Non Parole Period
Criminal Law Supply of Prohibited Drug Circumstantial Evidence Sentencing Non Parole Period

Source-derived case record

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

The Thu HUYNH

Applicant

REGINA

Respondent/crown

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in the approach to circumstantial evidence
  2. 2 Whether evidence of coded language was properly admitted
  3. 3 Whether intercepted calls between third parties were wrongly admitted as hearsay

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge properly applied the law on circumstantial evidence, admitted relevant expert evidence within its permitted scope, did not err in findings or sentencing, and no grounds for reducing the sentence or setting aside conviction were demonstrated.

Court Disposition

Appeals dismissed

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction dismissed.
  • Application for leave to appeal against sentence granted, but appeal dismissed.