R v Trinh [2011] NSWDC 140

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Trinh [2011] NSWDC 140 Hearing dates: 4 March 2011 Decision date: 04 March 2011 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Gibson DCJ Decision: The offender is sentenced to a term of imprisonment of five years with a non-parole period of two years and nine months. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - sentence - supply of prohibited drug greater than the traffickable quantity and not less than the commercial quantity Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 44, 47(2), 48(1) and Pt 4 Div 1A Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), s 25 and Schedule 1 Cases Cited: Lorraway v R [2010] NSWCCA 46 Mulato v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 282 R v Blair [2005] NSWCCA 78 R v Clark, New South Wales, Court of Criminal Appeal, unreported, 15 March 1990 R v Clark (1997) A Crim R 585 R v Colledge [2010] NSWCCA 302 R v Shi [2004] NSWCCA 135 Regina v Misiepo [2005] NSWCCA 405 The Attorney-General's Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 No 1 of 2002 [2004] NSWCCA 303; (2004) NSWLR 305 Vu v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 188 Texts Cited: - Category: Sentence Parties: Joseph Nguyen Trinh Representation: Mr Kiru - Crown Mr Turnbull SC - File Number(s): 2010/112625 Publication restriction: None

Judgment 1Joseph Nguyen Trinh has pleaded guilty to supplying a prohibited drug, namely 698.9 grams of methylamphetamine. This is an amount greater than the traffickable quantity of and not less than the commercial quantity in accordance with Schedule 1 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) and is an offence against s 25(2) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act for which the maximum penalty is 20 years and/or 3,500 penalty units, with a standard non-parole period of 10 years. 2There is in addition a Form 1 charge, namely supply of a prohibited drug (8.6g of cocaine) (s 25(1) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act ). 3The offender was arrested on 5 May 2010 following execution of a search warrant at premises he was occupying. 4The facts of the offence (which I have summarised from the material set out in Exhibit A, and from information given in the oral evidence of the offender in this court) are as follows. On 5 May 2010, police executed a search warrant at premises occupied by the accused and found the offender at the top of the stairs opposite a bedroom door which was closed and locked. They kicked in the door and found the co-offender sitting on the bed. Police observed small piles of pink-coloured pills, a pile of resealable plastic bags and 10 resealable plastic bags containing white powder. 5The offender was arrested and cautioned and conveyed to the police station. Later that same day he was conveyed back to the premises the subject of the search warrant, and a search o the premises was conducted in his presence. Police seized 285 pink-coloured pills sorted into bunches, 10 resealable bags containing white powder and a further 3,277 pink-coloured pills separated into three resealable plastic bags, as well as some other items such as an open packet of glucose powder and items of paperwork. 6There is a certificate of analysis by Sydney West Area Health Service noting that 21.4 g of the pink tablets were tested and that the drug purity was 1.5%. The remaining 60.5g of pink tablets were not tested. The white powder tested was found to be cocaine with a purity of 48%; this is the subject of the Form 1 charge. 7The offender, who has remained in custody on this matter since 5 May 2010, pleaded guilty at the first opportunity.