Regina v Muri Junior Balogun

The Application for Leave to Appeal against Sentence 24 The appellant did not give evidence at the proceedings on sentence. 25 Judge Holt was asked to find, and his Honour did in fact find, that the role of the appellant had been that of a courier; and more particularly, an "internal courier" rather than an "external courier". His Honour was, of course, bound to have regard to the matters prescribed by section 16A(2) of the Crimes Act 1914 (C'th). The remarks on sentence contain a precise and careful discussion of all of those matters that were relevant to the appellant's particular case. I see no error in any part of that precise and careful analysis by his Honour. 26 Judge Holt expressed the view that the offence was "a most serious offence, taking into account the objective features, ……". That assessment was, in my respectful opinion, justified. 27 The conclusion ultimately reached by Judge Holt was that the appellant's case merited a head sentence of imprisonment for 12 years. His Honour reduced the sentence by one-third in order to comply with the then requirements of section 16G, (since repealed), of the Crimes Act. His Honour set the non-parole period at 62-1/2 percent of the head sentence, a point within the permissible range. The quantity of MDMA prescribed by statute as the commercial quantity is 500 grams. The pure quantity of MDMA in the parcel which the appellant undoubtedly handled with, as the jury found, the requisite knowledge and intent was 1.323 kilograms: that is to say, a little more than 2-1/2 times the prescribed commercial quantity. The street and the wholesale values as noted earlier herein were, of course, estimates. Even the taking of a conservative view of such estimates underscores the true extent and potential of this particular illicit transaction. The objective culpability of the appellant's offence was very high. The subjective features of his case were not insignificant; but they were analysed and assessed fairly and carefully by his Honour. 28 In those circumstances, I am unpersuaded that the head sentence upon which his Honour ultimately settled was a sentence falling outside the permissible range. 29 I would grant leave to appeal but dismiss the appeal against sentence.