NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Giles-Adams v R; Preca v R [2023] NSWCCA 122 Hearing dates: 24 April 2023 Date of orders: 7 June 2023 Decision date: 07 June 2023 Before: Wright J at [1] Yehia J at [5] Chen J at [149] Decision: (1) Grant leave to appeal to each applicant. (2) Allow the appeal in each case. (3) Quash each of the sentences imposed on 29 October 2021, and in lieu thereof each applicant is sentenced to a non-parole period of 8 years commencing on 15 August 2020 and expiring on 14 August 2028, with a balance of term of 5 years and 6 months, expiring on 14 February 2034. (4) Each applicant will be eligible for release to parole at the expiration of the non-parole period. Catchwords: CRIME — APPEALS — Appeal against sentence — Attempting to import a commercial quantity of a border-controlled drug — Failure to take into account a willingness to facilitate the course of justice — Whether a finding of involvement at 'an intermediate level' was open — Whether the sentencing judge erred in the assessment of objective seriousness of the offence — Parity Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 22A, 25D Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), ss 16A, 16A(2), 16A(2)(f), 16A(2)(g) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(c) Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth), ss 11.1(1), 307.1(1) Cases Cited: Baden v R [2020] NSWCCA 23 Bae v R [2020] NSWCCA 35 Bertilone v R (2009) 197 A Crim R 78 Betka v R; Ghazaoui v R; Hawchar v R [2020] NSWCCA 191 Chuang, Chih Wen v R; Chen, Chun Hung v R [2020] NSWCCA 60 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Thomas (2016) 262 A Crim R 198; [2016] VSCA 237 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462; [2011] HCA 49 Hili v The Queen (2010) 204 CLR 520; [HCA] 45 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Jinde Huang aka Wei Liu v R [2018] NSWCCA 70; (2018) 272 A Crim R 266 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606; [1984] HCA 46 Magro v R [2020] NSWCCA 25 Mulato v R [2006] NSWCCA 282 Ooi v R [2023] NSWCCA 97 Power v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 623; [1974] HCA 26 R v Bimahendali [1999] NSWCCA 409; (1999) 109 A Crim R 355 R v Borkowski [2009] NSWCCA 102; (2009) 195 A Crim R 1 R v Lee [2007] NSWCCA 234 R v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54 R v Thomson; R v Houlten (2000) 49 NSWLR 383; [2000] NSWCCA 309 Rees v R [2012] NSWCCA 47 Tyler v The Queen [2007] NSWCCA 247; (2007) 173 A Crim R 458 Xiao v R (2018) NSWLR 1; [2018] NSWCCA 4 Youkhana, Jerome v R [2011] NSWCCA 37 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Jackson Ross Giles-Adams (First Applicant) Christopher John Preca (Second Applicant) Rex (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: P Lange (First Applicant) T Game SC (Second Applicant) A Chhabra (Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate