District Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v Sanchez [2015] NSWDC 394 Hearing dates: 27 August 2015 Date of orders: 27 August 2015 Decision date: 27 August 2015 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: Berman SC DCJ Decision: Sentenced to imprisonment for a period of 12 months. To be released on a recognizance release order at the expiry of 6 months. Under the Proceeds of Crime Act $400,527 is forfeited to the Commonwealth Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – Sentence - Dealing with money reasonably suspected of being the proceeds of crime. Category: Sentence Parties: The Crown Mario Sanchez Representation: Solicitors: Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) – Crown Legal Aid Commission - Offender File Number(s): 2015/96235 SENTENCE 1. HIS HONOUR: Whilst living in the United States of America the offender Mario Sanchez was offered a job. He was told that he would be paid $5,000 plus expenses to travel to Australia and perform the very simple task of collecting money from location A and taking it to location B. His suspicions were undoubtedly aroused by this offer. He sought reassurance. The person who asked him, the brother of his ex-wife, assured him that everything was above board and so Mr Sanchez came to Australia in order to earn that money. 2. Today he gave evidence that he did not believe that when he came to Australia he was going to be involved in anything criminal and that that realisation only came to him as he was on his way to location A to pick up the money. 3. I reject that. It is inconceivable that the offender could have thought that everything was above board, given the nature of the task required of him, moving money from one location to another and the amount which he was to be paid. I will sentence the offender on this basis: He realised there was a significant risk when he came into Australia that he was here for an illegal purpose. 4. The offender arrived in Australia on 30 March having agreed that he would do what his ex-brother-in-law asked him to. He booked into a hotel and the following day went to an address at Arndell Park where he got a large sum of money, slightly more than $400,000 in cash. He took that back to his hotel room and was in the process of counting it when police officers entered. 5. The offender has now pleaded guilty to an offence of dealing with money, being Australia currency worth more than $100,000, which is reasonably suspected of being the proceeds of crime. The maximum penalty for that offence is three years imprisonment, the maximum penalty having relatively recently been increased. 6. Of course one way that the authorities attempt to deal with crime is by intercepting the proceeds and making it harder for criminals to obtain their ill-gotten gains. Thus offences of the type for which Mr Sanchez pleaded guilty are important weapons in the armoury which the authorities use to fight crime. 7. His offence was serious for that reason. He is a man who has just turned 39 in fact he had his 39th birthday in custody a few days ago. He is of prior good character. He left Cuba and moved to America to live with his father. He has four children, two aged 18 and 13 were living with him before he left to come to Australia and commit this offence. And he has two other children who live with their mother, they are aged six and 11 and the offender assists them by sending money to them. 8. His father has apparently recently been diagnosed with leukaemia. The hardship to third parties occasioned by sentencing Mr Sanchez to gaol is certainly not exceptional but it is part of the general mix of subjective factors and certainly he will do his time in custody harder, knowing that his father is ill and that his children need his help. On the other hand not too much can be made of the fact that the offender will be serving his sentence in a foreign country. He came to Australia, as I have said, at least suspicious of the illegality of what he was being asked to perform. 9. He has pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity and in that regard he has also assisted the authorities in two respects. He has told police apparently all he knew about where the money came from and where it was to go and since he has been in custody, has assisted the authorities in another way. There was an allegation of an assault upon his cellmate by four prison officers. The offender has provided statements to police about that matter. Somewhat remarkably the evidence would suggest those four corrective service officers still work in the pod where Mr Sanchez is incarcerated. That is enough to indicate again how Mr Sanchez will do his time in custody harder than would ordinarily be the case. In order to reflect Mr Sanchez's willingness to assist the authorities by pleading guilty and his assistance to the authorities I will impose him a sentence which is 40% less than it would otherwise have been. 10. Consistent with Mr Sanchez's prior good character he has expressed his remorse and done well in custody, behaving himself and participating, as the reference from the chaplain indicates, in activities of a positive nature. I believe that his remorse, which he expressed today, is genuine. 11. It remains however the case that his conduct was serious and he went into this with his eyes open. A sentence of full time custody is therefore required. 12. He has done almost five months in custody so far. Ms Manea who appears for him today submitted that that was enough, I do not agree. A further period, albeit a short further period of full time custody is required in order to reflect the objective gravity of his conduct. 13. The order I make is this the offender is sentenced to imprisonment. I set a sentence of 12 months to have commenced on 31 March 2015. He is to be released after serving six months that is on 30 September 2015 upon entering into a recognisance to be of good behaviour for a period of six months expiring on 30 March 2016. 14. Mr Sanchez let me just explain to you what I've done. The thing you really want to know is how long further you have to do in prison. You will be released on 30 September 2015 that's just more than a month from today okay. I presume you will then be deported but that's not a matter for me, it's a matter for other people. But in any case as far as I am concerned, as far as you are concerned the sentence that I imposed upon you requires that you spent slightly more than a month more in custody okay, do you understand that? 15. OFFENDER: Yes. 16. HIS HONOUR: Take a seat. 17. DUNSTAN: Your Honour can I just check something in terms of the cognisance release order he may be required to set some sort of surety it can be self in the sum of a nominal sum. 18. HIS HONOUR: Self in the sum of $500. Thank you for your assistance. ********** DISCLAIMER - Every effort has been made to comply with suppression orders or statutory provisions prohibiting publication that may apply to this judgment or decision. The onus remains on any person using material in the judgment or decision to ensure that the intended use of that material does not breach any such order or provision. Further enquiries may be directed to the Registry of the Court or Tribunal in which it was generated. Decision last updated: 20 May 2016