appeal against sentence — attempting to import commercial quantity of a border controlled drug offence contrary to ss 11.1(1) and 307.1(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code — original sentence imposed 13 years’ and 10 months imprisonment with a 9 year non-parole period — co-operation — director appealing sentence as offender failed in part to co-operate in accordance with their undertaking — it cannot be said that when giving evidence the offender obliterated all incriminatory references to co-offender but offender may be said to have done their best — judges consider that offender’s partial failure to abide by undertaking was significant rather than modest — court’s function is not to punish but to assess the extent of non-co-operation in context provided for by s 16AC(4)(b) — whether co-offender was convicted or acquitted is beside the point, just as was the reason for co-offender’s acquittal — a ‘modest’ increase in sentence would suffice — nature and circumstances of the offence — offender appealing sentence on basis of error of judge — in a single sentence of sentencing remarks, sentencing judge misdescribed offender’s role in hierarchy of offending as offender not principal in attempted importation, offender pleaded guilty and to some extent lived up to undertaking to assist in prosecution of other offenders — judge did not fall into error of not going beyond categorising offending and failing to consider all the circumstances — the ‘group one’ misdescription was of no consequence but a needless distraction the like of which should be avoided by sentencing judges — offender’s appeal dismissed — re-sentence — 16 years’ and 6 months imprisonment with a 10 year 9 month non-parole period — 6AAA — in director’s appeal, if offender had not pleaded guilty, a sentence of 20 years’ imprisonment would have been imposed with a 15 year non-parole period
