Ta and Nguyen v R [2011] NSWCCA 32

Ta and Nguyen v R [2011] NSWCCA 32

Although some evidence at trial was inadmissible hearsay and the relevant questions were leading, the evidence was effectively withdrawn from the jury’s consideration by judicial and prosecutorial conduct, and no substantial miscarriage of justice occurred. On sentence, the judge erred in treating inherent offence...

Source-derived case information.

Parties
Appellant: Thi Dung Ta; Appellant: Phi Hung Nguyen; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 March 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment on Conviction and Sentence Appeals
Outcome
Conviction appeals dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted; sentence appeals allowed; original sentences quashed; reduced sentences imposed.
Legal Topics
Cultivation of Cannabis, Sentencing Appeals, Hearsay Evidence, Leading Questions, Miscarriage of Justice, Aggravating Factors, Application of Weissensteiner and Azzopardi Principles
Criminal Law Cultivation of Cannabis Sentencing Appeals Hearsay Evidence Leading Questions Miscarriage of Justice Aggravating Factors Application of Weissensteiner and Azzopardi Principles

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 13 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Thi Dung Ta

Appellant

Phi Hung Nguyen

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment on Conviction and Sentence Appeals

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the trial judge erred in failing to discharge the jury due to inadmissible hearsay and leading questions
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judge erred in finding aggravating factors inherent in the offence
  3. 3 Whether the assessment of the appellants' role in the commission of the offence was incorrect

Ratio Decidendi

Although some evidence at trial was inadmissible hearsay and the relevant questions were leading, the evidence was effectively withdrawn from the jury’s consideration by judicial and prosecutorial conduct, and no substantial miscarriage of justice occurred. On sentence, the judge erred in treating inherent offence characteristics (in company, public safety, planned/organised activity) as aggravating factors; the offence was well below the middle of the range of objective seriousness and required lesser sentences.

Court Disposition

Conviction appeals dismissed; leave to appeal against sentence granted; sentence appeals allowed; original sentences quashed; reduced sentences imposed.

Orders

  • Appeal against conviction dismissed for each appellant.
  • Leave to appeal against sentence granted for each appellant.