A sentencing judge cannot characterise the 'instrument of crime' element of a s.400.3(1)(b)(ii) offence more seriously than the Crown's case warrants; where the Crown identifies the predicate offence as a breach of reporting requirements under s.53(1) of the Anti-Money Laundering and Counter-Terrorism Financing Act 2006 (Cth), the court cannot sentence on the basis that the money was intended for more serious unspecified criminal activity. The presumptive non-parole period ratio applicable to NSW State offences does not apply to Commonwealth offences. Consent to a confiscation order under the Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) provides little assistance on the issue of contrition where the offender was caught in the act and the money did not belong to them.
The full text is available to signed-in members, including the 6 later cases that cite this judgment.