Long Hung Nguyen, you have pleaded guilty to one charge of cultivating a narcotic plant in not less than a commercial quantity. The maximum penalty for that offence is 25 years' imprisonment.
The facts are set out in the prosecution opening, which was tendered upon your plea. I do not propose to recite those facts in full now, but I direct that a copy be annexed to these reasons for sentence as the agreed factual basis upon which you have pleaded. In essence, however, between 8 February 2016 and 13 April 2016 you and others cultivated some 153 cannabis plants weighing approximately 47 kilograms at premises leased for those purposes in Frankston South.
You were at the time of your offending unlawfully in Australia, as your student visa had expired in June of 2015. You describe becoming involved in circumstances where you were unable to continue with your studies for financial reasons. You had discontinued and, as you describe it, you were 'couch surfing', trying to support yourself however you could. You were also, it seems, feeling pressure to assist your family, whose circumstances I shall turn to in a moment.
You described being approached in those circumstances and agreeing to participate in this criminal activity. Your role, it is conceded, involved more than simply tending or what is colloquially described as 'sitting the crop'. You were actively involved in renting the premises and the presentation of false documentation to facilitate this. It is clear from your actions that you knew from the beginning that you were engaging in an illegal enterprise.
As a result of a disturbance at the premises on 8 February 2016, police attended the property and later executed a search warrant upon it. The cannabis plants were located in four grow rooms within the house. Dry cannabis was also located in one room, as was the usual equipment involved in such cultivation. You were arrested some four days later.
You at that time denied involvement in the offending. You were remanded in custody and it is agreed that you have now served 189 days by way of pre-sentence detention. I am sentencing you on the basis that you pleaded guilty at the earliest opportunity, namely at the first committal mention.
Your offending is by its nature serious, as is indicated by the maximum penalty imposed by Parliament. Your role was that of a person employed by others. It is not put that you had any proprietary interest, nor that you were to share in the profit from the cultivation. You were paid for your services, which included, as I have indicated, sourcing the property, setting the property up and tending to the crop.
It is put that your role is above that of what is usually described as a crop sitter but below that of an organiser. What that means is in some ways difficult to discern, but objectively you were an employee regardless of the tasks that you were asked to perform. You were classically, it seems, targeted to become involved in the sense that it would have been clear that you were a young foreign national with little support who was in financial difficulty. These are hallmarks often seen in what are described as crop sitters.
Your involvement in the renting of the property increases your role but it does not make you a principal or someone with a proprietary interest. I have had regard to the Court of Appeal decision in Nguyen and I do not think it can be said that you are truly a mid or high-range offender. You played a role at the direction of others over a relatively short period in relation to a single crop and importantly, as I have said on a number of occasions, you had no financial interest in it.
As regards your personal circumstances you are aged 19, you were 19 at the date of these offences. You have no prior convictions either here or in Vietnam. You were born in a small town situated on the central coast of Vietnam. Your father was a fisherman, he owned a small fishing boat with his siblings. You have two younger brothers. You finished Year 11 and you were undertaking Year 12 when you left school. You describe your family as being in poor economic circumstances.
In order to advance the family's interests it was decided that you would be sent to Australia to study. Your enrolment and your student visa were arranged through an agency. Home stay accommodation was also arranged by that agent. You arrived in Australia, commenced studying English at La Trobe University; however, unforeseen events in Vietnam meant that your family circumstances changed and they were no longer able to afford your university fees. You were forced to discontinue.
While you were studying at La Trobe University it seems that there had been an event that involved a chemical discharge into the sea where your family's fishing activities were located that substantially affected the viability of the industry in that area. It was these circumstances that led to your family being unable to further support your studies in Australia. You were also advised, it seems, that that was the reason that your younger brother had had to leave school. It was in these circumstances that you found yourself being unsupported financially by your family and, as I have indicated, you describe yourself as couch surfing with acquaintances.
I accept that it was in in this context that you were approached by people who offered to pay you for your services as regards this cultivation. Following your arrest you were able to make a telephone call to your parents. You told them that you have been arrested and that you were in custody. It is clear that upon your release from custody you will be deported.
In terms of mitigating factors I turn firstly to your youth. You are in every sense a young offender, aged just 19, without prior convictions. In my view you also demonstrated some naivety and immaturity as regards your involvement in this offending.
You are a person without prior convictions, you have pleaded guilty at a very early state. In my view you have shown remorse both by your plea and the time at which you pleaded in relation to this matter.
As regards your prospects of rehabilitation they must be described as positive in circumstances where you have no prior convictions, you pleaded guilty, you are still young and in my view, given that this is your first time in custody, it is likely to have had significant deterrent effect as regards future conduct. Your time in custody has been in my view made more onerous as a result of your isolation from your family. You are here in this country as a person without any real supports other than those provided to you within a prison setting.
As well as matters personal to you, I must of course take into account relevant sentencing principles. General deterrence is in the usual course given significant weight in relation to matters of this type, albeit in your case the usual weight afforded to general deterrence is properly ameliorated on account of your youth. In my view specific deterrence can be given less weight given your history. Any sentence imposed must satisfy principles including just punishment and denunciation of your conduct.
In my view in relation to this matter there are compelling circumstances which justify the imposition of a sentence which might otherwise be seen as outside the range. In that regard I note your youth, lack of priors, isolation, circumstances in which you became involved in the offending, and in my view it is appropriate for there to be an element of mercy as regards your current circumstances.
In relation to this matter on the charge of cultivating a commercial quantity of cannabis you are convicted and sentenced to be imprisoned for 14 months. I direct that 189 days be reckoned as served. I direct it be noted in the records of the court that were it not for your plea of guilty I would have imposed a sentence of 22 months.
Pursuant to s.464ZF of the Crimes Act I direct that you undergo a forensic procedure for the taking of a scraping of the mouth or blood sample in accordance with Sub-division 30A of Part 3 of the Crimes Act until a sample of sufficient standard is obtained for placement on the database. In my view the order is justified having regard to the seriousness of your offending. You do not oppose the making of the order and it is in the public interest.
COUNSEL: As Your Honour pleases.
HER HONOUR: Nothing further, counsel?
MR SAUNDERS: No, Your Honour.
MR MANNING: I could hand up that order if it would assist.
HER HONOUR: Thank you very much. 10 o'clock, thank you.