Pan v R [2010] NSWCCA 243

Pan v R [2010] NSWCCA 243

The sentence was not excessive given the quantity of cocaine and the applicant's significant role in organising its distribution. The sentencing judge adequately accounted for rehabilitation prospects, delay and good conduct by adjusting the relationship between the non-parole period and total sentence, and the...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 October 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'parity Between Co Offenders' 'discount for Guilty Plea and Cooperation' 'supply of Prohibited Drug in Not Less Than a Large Commercial Quantity']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'parity Between Co Offenders' 'discount for Guilty Plea and Cooperation' 'supply of Prohibited Drug in Not Less Than a Large Commercial Quantity']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant had a justifiable sense of grievance when comparing his sentence with that imposed on the co-offender.' 'Whether the applicant was entitled to a discount greater than 25% for his plea of guilty, cooperation and contrition.' "Whether there was gross, marked, glaring or manifest disparity between the applicant's sentence and the co-offender's sentence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence was not excessive given the quantity of cocaine and the applicant's significant role in organising its distribution. The sentencing judge adequately accounted for rehabilitation prospects, delay and good conduct by adjusting the relationship between the non-parole period and total sentence, and the applicant's plea, cooperation and contrition did not justify a discount exceeding 25%. There was no glaring or gross disparity between the applicant's sentence and the co-offender's sentence.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal but dismiss the appeal.']