Lam v The King

• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Appeal against sentence
  3. › Commonwealth drug offences
  4. › Trafficking in commercial and marketable quantities
  5. › Whether sentencing judge erred by assessing culpability by reference to gross quantities rather than pure quantities of drugs
  6. › Whether relativity between sentences for different drug types reflected pure quantities and respective maximum penalties
  7. › Criminal Code (Cth), ss 302.2(1), 302.3(1), 312.1
• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Sentencing
  3. › Commonwealth offences
  4. › Mandatory considerations
  5. › Probable effect of sentence on offender's family or dependants
  6. › Whether sentencing judge failed to consider impact on offender's daughter
  7. › Whether evidence of adverse impact existed
  8. › Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), s 16A(2)(p)
• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Sentencing
  3. › Discount for guilty plea
  4. › Commonwealth offences
  5. › Whether strength of prosecution case relevant to utilitarian value of plea
  6. › Whether sentencing judge conflated utilitarian and subjective components
  7. › Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), ss 16A(2)(f), 16A(2)(g)
• 1. Criminal Law
  2. › Sentencing
  3. › Totality principle
  4. › First limb
  5. › Multiple drug trafficking offences committed while on bail
  6. › Whether total effective sentence bore proper relationship to overall criminality
  7. › Whether cumulation of sentences for different drug types appropriate

Quick Take