Site Logo

Huang v The Queen [2018] NSWCCA 57

appeal against sentence — dealing in proceeds of crime contrary to s 400.3(1) of Commonwealth Criminal Code — pursuant to s 16BA sentencing judge took into account nine additional offences, five counts of commencing to receive a designated service using a false customer name and four counts of knowingly producing a driver licence in a false name contrary to ss 140(1) and 137(1) of Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth) — original sentence imposed 8 years’ imprisonment with 5 year non-parole period — guilty plea — s 16A(2)(g) — sentencing judge erred by not considering utilitarian value of plea — as such offender must be resentenced — plea entered on day trial listed for hearing — in addition case not particularly complex accordingly utilitarian value of plea not high — other offences — s 16BA — sentencing judge entitled to take into account offending conduct of s 16BA offences and nature and seriousness of that conduct — not for purpose of imposing punishment for those offences, but for purposes for which matters on a s 16BA may be taken into account including need for personal deterrence and community’s entitlement to exact retribution — rehabilitation — s 16A(2)(n) — offender engaged in employment since being taken into custody — offenders prospects of rehabilitation more positive than at time of assessment by sentencing judge — appeal allowed — offender resentenced to 6 years’ and 3 months imprisonment with 4 year and 8 month non-parole period
The CSD acknowledges Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander peoples as First Australians and recognises their culture, history, diversity and their deep connection to the land. We acknowledge that we are on the land of the traditional owners and pay respects to Elders past and present.

© 2024 The National Judicial College of Australia (NJCA). Powered by

Privacy Policy|Terms and Conditions

top-arrow