appeal on sentence — attempting to import tier 2 goods, namely multiple firearms and ammunition offence contrary to s 233BAB(5) of Customs Act 1901 (Cth) — dealing with money or other property with intent that it become an instrument of crime offence contrary to s 400.6(1) of Commonwealth Criminal Code — original sentence imposed 3 years’ and 6 months imprisonment with 2 year and 4 month non-parole period — manifest excess — if there are no directly comparable cases, an intermediate appellate court is not precluded from deciding that an individual sentence is manifestly excessive — it merely has the consequence that court has no directly comparable cases to provide a yardstick against which to measure sentence — previous sentencing ranges are only one pointer to the adequacy of a sentence — the authorities on sentencing where tier 2 goods are child pornography or abuse material are not comparable, and the principles which guided sentencing in those cases are not directly applicable — objective seriousness — guns can be used repeatedly and remain a lasting threat to public safety — factors relevant to assessing seriousness of offending include the number of firearms and quantity of ammunition, nature of firearms, including readily concealable and semi-automatic, and nature of ammunition, what offender intended to do with them (sell them on black market), offender’s motive of financial gain, degree to which importation was planned and the steps taken to disguise offending and avoid detection, and difficulty of detecting such offences — offender attempted to disguise offending using the Dark Web, encrypted transactions and emails, Bitcoin and anonymised payment mechanisms — attempted importation serious — offender has not demonstrated that non-parole period or its relation to head sentence is unreasonable or plainly unjust — leave granted — appeal dismissed
