R v Nguyen [2022] NSWDC 452

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Nguyen [2022] NSWDC 452 Hearing dates: 7/3/22-21/3/22, 31/3/22, 8/7/22, 11/8/22 Date of orders: 11/8/22 Decision date: 11 August 2022 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Bourke SC DCJ Decision: Convicted and sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 12 years with a NPP of 8 years (18/5/21-17/5/29). I find special circumstances. The indicative sentences are: Count 1 Supply large comm qty methylamphetamine – 10 years with NPP 6 years 8 months. Count 2 Manufacture large comm qty methylamphetamine – 11 years with NPP 7 years 4 months. Re seq 4 on the s166 certificate – I convict the offender but impose no other penalty. I make the forfeiture order signed and dated by me today – the offender is to forfeit $3470 to the State. Catchwords: Crime – Sentence – Supply – Manufacture - Large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Cases Cited: Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 302 ALR 192 Nguyen v R [2007] NSWCCA 15 Category: Sentence Parties: NSW DPP – Crown Tri Van Nguyen - Offender Representation: Ms A Bonnor for Crown Ms E Ozen for Accused File Number(s): 2017/235713

SENTENCE 1. On 21 March 2022, after a trial before a jury, the offender, Mr Tri Van Nguyen was found guilty of counts 1 and 2 on the indictment, but not guilty of count 3. Count 1 is an offence under s 25(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act of supplying a prohibited drug, namely, 1.262 kilograms of methylamphetamine, being not less than a large commercial quantity. Count 2 is an offence under s 24(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act of manufacturing a prohibited drug, namely, 2,763 grams of methylamphetamine oil, being not less than a large commercial quantity. 2. The maximum penalty for each offence is life imprisonment and each offence has a standard non parole period of 15 years specified. The maximum penalty and standard non parole periods are important guideposts to which I have had regard. 3. It is for me to determine the facts for sentence which must be consistent with the jury verdict. Any matters in aggravation must be proved beyond reasonable doubt, whilst matters in mitigation need only be established on the balance of probabilities.