AI-generated summaries. Not legal advice. Always verify against the official judgment on NSW Caselaw.
← All decisions
1
Court of Criminal Appeal 19 December 2025

Campbell v R

[2025] NSWCCA 229

DrugsFirearms & weapons

Citation: Campbell v R [2025] NSWCCA 229
Court: NSW Court of Criminal Appeal
Date: 19 December 2025
Judges: Mitchelmore JA, Ierace J, Chen J

Background

The applicant pleaded guilty in the District Court to four offences: two Commonwealth offences of aiding and abetting the importation of a commercial quantity of methamphetamine (53.467 kg) and the trafficking of a marketable quantity of cocaine (492.7 g), and two State offences of unauthorised possession of firearms and possession of equipment to make false identification documents. His role in the drug offences involved leasing storage units under false identities and coordinating deliveries for a broader drug importation syndicate.

On 16 August 2024, the District Court sentenced the applicant to a total effective term of 6 years and 7 months imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 5 years and 1 month. The State sentences were backdated to the date of arrest (11 November 2022), while the Commonwealth sentences were structured to run consecutively upon the expiry of the non-parole periods of the preceding sentences.

The applicant sought leave to appeal against that sentence, arguing that the sentencing judge failed to properly apply the principle of totality when fixing the commencement dates of the consecutive sentences, and also erred in the structure of the sentences by reference to a "usual parole period."

  • Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to consider or apply the principle of totality when structuring three consecutive sentences (the aggregate State sentence followed by the two wholly consecutive Commonwealth sentences).
  • Whether the sentencing judge erred by having regard to a "usual period of parole" where none applied, and by failing to give effect to a stated intention to fix a longer than usual parole period.

Decision

The Court of Criminal Appeal unanimously upheld Ground 1 of the appeal. Ierace J (with Mitchelmore JA and Chen J agreeing) found that the sentencing judge had not explained how the totality principle applied in circumstances where the first Commonwealth sentence was made wholly consecutive on the non-parole period of the State sentence, and the second Commonwealth sentence was wholly consecutive on the expiry of the first Commonwealth sentence. This failure to articulate the totality analysis was an error.

The Court rejected any suggestion that the totality principle could be assumed to have been reflected in the leniency of the individual sentences. The sentences had been calibrated favourably to the applicant based on findings about the objective seriousness of the offending and his compelling subjective case, including contrition and commitment to rehabilitation. Applying the principles from Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59 and JT v R [2012] NSWCCA 133, the Court held that the totality principle required explicit engagement, not inference.

Because Ground 1 was established and resentencing was required, the Court found it unnecessary to determine Ground 2. On resentencing, the Court reduced the total effective term by one month and, more significantly, reduced the overall non-parole period by 5 months. The Court found special circumstances warranting a longer than usual ratio of parole to head sentence, noting the disconnection between the Commonwealth and State offences while also recognising that all offending occurred around the same time.

Orders Made

  • Leave to appeal granted.
  • Appeal allowed.
  • Sentences imposed in the District Court on 16 August 2024 quashed and replaced as follows:
  • Count 3 and the s 166 offence: aggregate sentence of 18 months imprisonment from 11 November 2022, expiring 10 May 2024, with a non-parole period of 12 months expiring 10 November 2023.
  • Count 2: 3 years imprisonment from 11 November 2023, expiring 10 November 2026.
  • Count 1: 3 years and 6 months imprisonment from 11 November 2025, expiring 10 May 2029.
  • Counts 1 and 2: a single non-parole period of 3 years and 8 months, commencing 11 November 2023 and expiring 10 July 2027.
  • Total effective sentence: 6 years and 6 months imprisonment with an overall non-parole period of 4 years and 8 months (a ratio of approximately 72%, reflecting special circumstances).

Key Takeaways

  • A sentencing judge who structures multiple consecutive sentences must affirmatively explain how the totality principle has been applied. Silence on the question constitutes error, even where individual sentences appear lenient.
  • The totality principle cannot be treated as having been implicitly satisfied simply because individual sentences were favourable to the offender on subjective grounds. The principle requires a separate and articulated assessment of whether the overall sentence is just and appropriate.
  • Where the Court of Criminal Appeal identifies error in the application of the totality principle, resentencing is required. The resentencing exercise involves a fresh consideration of all relevant factors, including objective seriousness, moral culpability, contrition, and rehabilitation.
  • A finding of special circumstances under Commonwealth and State sentencing frameworks can justify a non-parole period that represents a lower proportion of the head sentence than the standard ratio, with the Court here fixing a ratio of approximately 72% across the Commonwealth sentences.
  • Under s 16F of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), when a non-parole period is fixed for a Commonwealth offence, the court may request that the offender's legal representatives explain the purpose and consequences of that period to the offender.

Legislation and Cases Referenced

Legislation:
- Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 5, 44(1), 44(2), 53A
- Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 192L, 556A
- Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), ss 16A, 16F, 19AB(1), 19AH(1)
- Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(c)
- Criminal Code (Cth), ss 302.2(1), 302.3, 302.3(1), 307.1, 307.1(1), 307.2(1)
- Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), ss 166, 167(2)
- Drug Court Act 1998 (NSW), s 5A
- Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), ss 25(1), 25(2)
- Firearms Act 1996 (NSW), ss 7(1), 7A(1)

Cases:
- Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59; [1988] HCA 70
- JT v R [2012] NSWCCA 133
- Hili v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45
- Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37
- Hampton v R [2014] NSWCCA 131; (2014) 243 A Crim R 193
- McGregor v R (2024) 116 NSWLR 81; [2024] NSWCCA 200
- R v Bui [2025] NSWCCA 114
- R v Campbell [2024] NSWDC 413
- R v Miller, R v Omar [2021] NSWDRGC 1