NSW Caselaw
Supreme Court New South Wales
Medium Neutral Citation: R v IL (No 4) [2014] NSWSC 1801 Hearing dates: 11 December 2014 Decision date: 11 December 2014 Jurisdiction: Common Law - Criminal Before: Hamill J Decision: Sentenced to an aggregate non-parole period of 7½ years commencing on 2 December 2013 and expiring on 1 June 2021. There will be a balance of term of 4 years commencing on 2 June 2021 and expiring on 1 June 2025. Eligible for release on parole at the expiration of the non-parole period. Order that the drugs and weapons involved in the five counts on the indictment be forfeited to the Crown to be destroyed. As to the offences listed on the certificate under s 166 Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW): Sequence 3 (offender found on drug premises) is dismissed by consent. Sequence 4 (owner knowingly allow premises to be used as drug premises) is dismissed by consent. On the joint application of the parties, all remaining sequences (that is, sequences 1, 5, 6, 7, 8, 11, 13 and 14) are remitted to the Local Court. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - SENTENCE - manufacture of a large commercial quantity of methylamphetamine - clandestine laboratory in suburban premises - weapons and firearms charges - aggregate sentence - whether offence involved a grave risk of death to another person - death of co-offender in course of manufacture - whether aggravating feature - whether profit motive and lack of regard for public safety aggravating features - offender a middle aged woman of good character - limited period of involvement - balancing consistency of punishment against individual justice Legislation Cited: Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW)Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) Firearms Act 1996 (NSW) Cases Cited: Brown v R [2012] NSWCCA 199 DAB v R: NJB v R [2010] NSWCCA 275 DW v R [2012] NSWCCA 66 Eckersley v R [2013] NSWCCA 219 Greenaway v R [2013] NSWCCA 270 Lau v R [2010] NSWCCA 43 Melikian v R [2008] NSWCCA 156 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39 Olbrich v The Queen [1999] HCA 54 R v Hines (No 3) [2014] NSWSC 1273 R v Kalache [2000] NSWCCA 2 R v IL (No 2) [2014] NSWSC 1710 R v Little and Walsh [2006] NSWCCA 406 R v MacDonnell (2002) 128 A Crim R 44 R v Nykolyn [2012] NSWCCA R v RD [2014] NSWCCA 103 Reardon v R [2012] NSWCCA 46 SHR v R [2014] NSWCCA 94 Wong and Leung v The Queen [2001] HCA 64; 207 CLR 584 Category: Sentence Parties: Crown IL (Accused) Representation: Counsel: R Herps (Crown) R Pontello (Accused)
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