R v Sun [2017] NSWDC 456

District Court New South Wales

Medium Neutral Citation: R v Sun [2017] NSWDC 456 Hearing dates: 10 March 2017; 12 May 2017 Decision date: 23 June 2017 Jurisdiction: Criminal Before: King SC DCJ Decision: Convicted. Form 1 matter taken into account on sentence imposed in re SEQ 001. Special circumstances found – age, 1st time in custody. The offender is sentenced to a total term of imprisonment for 6 years, comprising of a NPP of 4 years to commence on 14/5/16 and to expire on 13/5/19, and a balance of term of 2 years to commence on 14/5/19 and to expire on 13/5/21. Eligible for release to parole on 13/5/19. Catchwords: CRIMINAL – sentence – supply commercial quantity of methylamphetamine - participate in a criminal group and contribute - joint criminal enterprise – offender's role - subjective matters Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 Category: Sentence Parties: Regina Bin Sun Representation: Counsel: Mr P Leask Mr B Walmsley QC

Solicitors: Mr M Dickinson Ms M Maltezos File Number(s): 2015/00144761

Judgment 1. HIS HONOUR: Mr Bin Sun appears for sentence in relation to a single offence of supply not less than a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine, being a quantity referred to as being at the top end of the range of a commercial quantity before becoming a large commercial quantity: that is, just less than 1 kilogram. Such an offence is contrary to s 25(2) of the Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985. The maximum penalty provided is 20 years' imprisonment and or 3,500 penalty units. There is also a standard non‑parole period of ten years in relation to such offences. 2. In addition to that offence, the offender asked the Court to take into account when sentencing him for that offence a further offence contained on a Form 1 pursuant to s 32 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999. That offence is one of participate in a criminal group and contribute contrary to s 93T(1) of the Crimes Act 1900, and when dealt with separately has a maximum penalty of five years' imprisonment. There is no relevant standard non‑parole period. 3. The facts are agreed and are as follows: 4. In December 2014, police attached to the State Crime Command Organised Crime Squad established Strike Force Sylvia to predominately investigate the activities of a co‑offender, Li Wang, and his involvement in the supply of large quantities of prohibited drug. As part of that investigation, between 21 March 2015 and 28 April 2015, several controlled operations were conducted where Wang supplied a police undercover operative, "George", a half kilogram of methylamphetamine on each occasion. He was also detected supplying small amounts of cocaine and Blackberry devices to the undercover operative. There is no evidence of the offender Bin Sun's involvement in those offences. 5. On 14 May 2015, police arranged another controlled operation where George was deployed to meet Wang at 1pm for the purported purchase of 2 kilograms of methylamphetamine for the payment of $251,000. It is in the course of this transaction that Bin Sun's involvement first came to light. 6. At about 12pm, three persons, Li Wang, Z Zhang and Si Ji Zhang, were seen attending the East Phoenix Dumpling Bar in the East Village Shopping Centre in Zetland. They were later seen walking around the shopping centre before Si Zhang and Li Wang entered the car park. Shortly after that the offender Bin Sun and a co-accused, Junjie Liang, were seen outside the main entrance to the complex on the corner of Defreis and Gadigal Avenues. Police observed Bin Sun loitering about 10 metres apart from Z Zhang and Liang, and then observed Zhang leave the scene and was out of sight momentarily before returning carrying a brown bag. 7. Shortly after that, police observed the offenders Bin Sun and Liang, each carrying a brown paper bag, walking into the Moore Park Supa Centre car park. At the time, Li Wang was seen seated in the passenger seat of George's motor vehicle. Soon after Z Zhang was seen walking north in the car park with Liang and Bin Sun following a few metres behind him. Z Zhang walked to George's vehicle and sat in the passenger seat behind the driver. The offender Bin Sun walked to the vehicle carrying the bag and entered the rear passenger seat. Liang walked towards the vehicle but hesitated and stepped backwards. S Zhang signalled Liang to walk to the vehicle. Liang then walked to the vehicle, approached the rear passenger window and thrust the bag he was carrying into Bin Sun's hands before walking away from the scene. 8. Soon after, at the request of "George", the offender handed both bags to "George" who was seated in the driver's seat. Soon after, officers from the Tactical Operations Unit intervened and all accused were placed under arrest. 9. In the two bags police found a total of 1,996.9 grams of methylamphetamine. Each bag contained just less than 1 kg of methylamphetamine. It is agreed that the accused only had knowledge that he was supplying a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine in an amount approaching the large commercial quantity, that is, just less than 1 kilogram. 10. The offender was part of a joint criminal enterprise to supply a significant quantity of a prohibited drug. The facts as provided to the Court indicate that it is accepted that he had no knowledge in effect of half of the drug supplied. Nonetheless, a quantity approaching 1 kg is a significant quantity of a prohibited drug, the payment in respect of which was approximately $125,500. 11. Methylamphetamine is not distinguished from other prohibited drugs other than by quantity. However, it is evident in recent years that methylamphetamine has become a serious problem of an increasing nature for the community. There is no level of society or geographical area in New South Wales where it has not penetrated and its adverse effects on those who use it and the community itself are well known. 12. Taking part in a supply of almost 1 kg of methylamphetamine in any role is a serious matter. I accept however that there is no evidence in relation to Mr Bin Sun that he had any earlier involvement other than his attendance on that day, 14 May 2015, and that from the facts, he appears to be acting at the direction of others. For that reason, I assess his role as being less serious than the role of others present and participating that day. However, within the range of offences covered by s 25(2) relating to a commercial quantity of methylamphetamine, I regard the objective seriousness of this matter as being in the midrange of objective seriousness.