Regina v Soo [2005] NSWCCA 161

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION: Regina v Soo [2005] NSWCCA 161

HEARING DATE(S): 22/04/2005

JUDGMENT DATE: 28 April 2005

JUDGMENT OF: Grove J at 1; Howie J at 2; Latham J at 33

DECISION: 1. Leave to appeal is granted and the appeal allowed in part 2. The sentence for count 1 is confirmed but is to date from 30 April 2003. There is to be a non-parole period of 6 years to expire on 29 April 2009 the date upon which the applicant is eligible to bve released to parole. 3. The sentence for count 4 is confirmed but is to date from 30 April 2003 with a non-parole period of 6 years to expire on 29 April 2009 the date upon which the applicant is eligible to be released to parole.

CATCHWORDS: Criminal Law - Sentencing - no matter of principle - Fresh evidence - psychiatric report prepared after sentence - rejected.

LEGISLATION CITED: Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 - ss 25, 33(3)

R v Walsh [2004] NSWCCA 435 CASES CITED: R v Goodwin (1990) 51 A Crim R 238 R v Fordham (1998) 98 A Crim R 359

PARTIES: Regina v John Chih Soo

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2004/3047 CCAP

V. Lydiard - Crown COUNSEL: R. Button - Applicant

S. Kavanagh - Crown SOLICITORS: S.E. O'Connor - Applicant

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 03/11/0722

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Woods DCJ

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 2004/3047 CCAP

GROVE J HOWIE J LATHAM J

THURSDAY 28 APRIL 2005 REGINA v JOHN CHIH SOO Judgment 1 GROVE J: I agree with Howie J. 2 HOWIE J: The applicant was convicted after a trial in the District Court of eight counts alleging offences under the Drug Misuse & Trafficking Act (the Act). The first count was one of supplying a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine, contrary to ss 25 and 33(3) of the Act and in respect of which the maximum penalty is imprisonment for life. The fourth count alleged that the applicant on three separate occasions supplied methylamphetamine for financial reward. That is an offence contrary to s 25A of the Act and for which the maximum penalty of 20 years is prescribed. The five further counts each involved the supply of a particular type of drug. In counts three and five, the drug supplied was ecstasy. In the other three counts the drugs supplied were as follows: count 6 cannabis leaf; count seven, cocaine; and count eight, lysergide. In respect of the offences of supply, other than where the drug was cannabis, the maximum penalty is 15 years imprisonment. In respect of the offence of supplying cannabis leaf the maximum penalty was imprisonment for 10 years. 3 As a consequence of his conviction for these offences he was sentenced by Judge Woods QC (the Judge) as follows: Count 1: imprisonment for 10 years to date from 1 May 2004 with a non-parole period of 6 years to expire on 30 April 2010.