NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Farrell v R [2020] NSWCCA 195 Hearing dates: 5 June 2020 Date of orders: 7 August 2020 Decision date: 07 August 2020 Before: Meagher JA at [1] Wilson J at [2] N Adams J at [3] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal is granted. (2) The appeal is allowed. (3) The sentence imposed on the applicant in the District Court on 10 October 2019 is quashed. In lieu thereof the following aggregate sentence is imposed under s 53A of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure Act) 1999 (NSW): 3 years of imprisonment to date from 18 December 2018 and expire on 17 December 2021 with a non-parole period of 1 year and 10 months to expire on 17 October 2020. (4) Pursuant to s 53A(4) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) the indicative sentences are: Count 1: 2 years and 4 months imprisonment. Count 2: 2 years and 6 months imprisonment. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – appeal – appeal against sentence – intimidating witness – revealing informer status – applicant in custody at time of offending – intimidation carried out via Instagram post "Sydneyinformant" – #supergrass – commencement of sentence – sentencing principles – irrelevant considerations – related offences Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 326(2) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence) Act 2007 (NSW), s 14(1) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 24(a), s 33, s 44, s 47, s 53A Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6(3) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 166 Cases Cited: Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 Callaghan v The Queen (2006) 160 A Crim R 145; [2006] NSWCCA 58 Hampton v R (2014) 243 A Crim R 193, [2014] NSWCCA 131 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Hutchen v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 101 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 R v Farrell [2019] NSWDC 835 R v Kitchener [2003] NSWCCA 134 Refaieh v R (2018) 272 A Crim R 245; [2018] NSWCCA 72 Sultana v R [2007] NSWCCA 107 Van Zwam v R [2017] NSWCCA 127 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Lance Stuart Farrell (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr D Barrow (Applicant) Mr R Hatfield (Respondent)
We try to embed the page this law was scraped from. If the site blocks framing, you still get the link and a local excerpt.
Last checked with source on —
Checking whether the official page can be embedded…
Plain-English simplify of this law: a short summary, key points, and both sides of the argument. Generated on first view via Replicate, then cached. Vote on what helps your study.
No study brief is cached for this law yet. Sign up to generate a plain-English brief.
Sign up to generate