Site Logo

Jackson v The Queen [2020] NSWCCA 230

appeal against sentence — importing a commercial quantity of a border controlled drug offence contrary to s 307.1(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code, deal with money which is and is believed to be proceeds of crime valued at $50,000 or more offence contrary to s 400.5(1) of the Commonwealth Criminal Code — offences relate to 547.71kg of cocaine and $60,000 in cash respectively — original sentence imposed 19 years’ and 6 months imprisonment with a 12 year and 6 month non-parole period — manifest excess nature and circumstances of the offence — s 16A(2)(a) — as correctly identified by sentencing judge, this is extremely serious example of serious crime — in appropriately characterising role of offender, sentencing judge is not bound by label ascribed to offender’s role by counsel — Crown described role of offender as “principal in Australia”, which is an accurate description — offender chose persons to work on importation, dealt with principals overseas, took possession of drugs, handled money of behalf of syndicate, determined amount paid to co-offenders, responsible for holding $12 million for principals for first round of drugs and holding 300kg of drugs for what would become second sale — characterisation by learned sentencing judge open and correct, if not understated — offender unable to point to any identifiable error in reasons provided by sentencing judge — age — s 16A(2)(m) — offender 63 years old at time of offence and 64 at time of sentence — more advance age may render imprisonment more onerous than for someone younger — age may be relevant that offender should have opportunity for rehabilitation in community at conclusion of sentence — where effect of sentence is that unlikely offender will have any meaningful life after its conclusion, this may be an important consideration in sentence to be imposed — at 76, when offender first eligible for parole, he will likely have many years ahead of him in which to establish his rehabilitation — general deterrence — s 16A(2)(ja) — this extremely serious offence involved more than 273 times the commercial threshold for necessary offence of this kind — there are reasons why general deterrence and need for punishment loom large — sentence imposed by sentencing judge neither plainly unjust nor unreasonable — leave to appeal granted — appeal dismissed
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.

© 2023 The National Judicial College of Australia (NJCA). Powered by

Privacy Policy|Terms and Conditions

top-arrow