DPP v Tran [2017] VCC 1183 | Case summary | Zoe

/

/

There was an electrical bypass but you have not been charged with theft.
You were taken by police to be interviewed and you declined to be interview, which is your right, and accordingly there is no early explanation before me as to how all this came about.
A gaol sentence in this situation is inevitable; general deterrence demands that. In your situation I have no doubt that you will be deported, and accordingly specific deterrence will have very little to do with it.
There must also be proper attention to denunciation and appropriate punishment. The situation of you rehabilitating is a matter for you. You certainly will not be reoffending in this country, and I am told that going back to Vietnam as a convicted drug criminal is not a very pleasant experience.
In any event, you came to Australia in November of 2013 as a 17-year-old. Your family of origin in Vietnam is a mother, father and two sisters, and they still reside there. When you got here you undertook a one year English course. You then enrolled in a Diploma of Business at La Trobe University and were working as a waiter at a reception centre in St Albans. Your mother sustained injuries and you from that point refused to accept financial support from your family, so you say. You discontinued study, and you then found employment on a cucumber farm and then worked in a laundry.
You were clearly approached and entered into this, not that I am making any findings as to how it all came about. I rarely if ever believe the instructions in matter such as this. I understand how all this works and threats to family and things like that, so you just get sentenced in a vacuum as far as I am concerned.
Your age, your plea of guilty, your cooperation insofar as the court is concerned, if not the authorities, means that a sentence should be mitigated. I take into account the deportation, not in the sense that you will be deported as such, but the aspirations you may have had when you came to this country are now going to be crushed and you will undergo the sentence with the expectation of deportation.
Because of your youth I am going to give you an opportunity for parole, which will effectively mean an opportunity to be deported at an earlier stage than might otherwise have been the case.
Accordingly, in simple terms on the charge of cultivation, two years, minimum term of 12 months. I declare 135 days be reckoned as having been served under this sentence.
Pursuant to s.6AAA, but for your plea of guilty you would have been sentenced to be imprisoned for a period of three years and 18 months.
So Mr Interpret, it is two years with 12 months, with 135 days served. The 6AAA if you had tried to fight it, would have been three years with 18 months as a minimum term. All right?
There are no other orders I have to make? I have done the others, haven't I?
MR HUTTON: Correct.
HIS HONOUR: Did you want to say anything?
MS McGRATH: Sorry, Your Honour?
HIS HONOUR: Did you want to say something?
MS McGRATH: No.
HIS HONOUR: No.
MS McGRATH: If the court pleases.
HIS HONOUR: No, that is all right. As long as he gets his - I do not know if you want to talk to him or not?
MR McGRATH: I might have a quick - can I?
HIS HONOUR: Yes, the interpreter is just taking him through the sentencing remarks. Thanks for that. All right, just hold him for a second so his counsel can just speak to him for a minute, if you would, fellas.

DPP v Tran [2017] VCC 1183 | Case summary | Zoe