R v Anquetil [2021] NSWCCA 59

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v Anquetil [2021] NSWCCA 59 Hearing dates: 27 November 2020 Decision date: 09 April 2021 Before: Bathurst CJ at [1]; Hoeben CJ at CL at [159]; Bellew J at [160] Decision: Appeal dismissed. Catchwords: CRIME – appeals – appeal against sentence – manifest inadequacy – whether there was a misapplication of principle – objective seriousness – where objectiveness seriousness above the midrange CRIME – appeals – appeal against sentence – manifest inadequacy – comparative cases – whether comparable cases provide a meaningful range of sentences as a yardstick Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) Criminal Code Act 1899 (Qld) Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) Proceeds of Crime Act 2002 (Cth) Cases Cited: Abbas v R [2013] NSWCCA 115; (2013) 231 A Crim R 413 Attorney General's Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (No 1 of 2002) (2002) 56 NSWLR 146; [2002] NSWCCA 518 CMB v The Attorney General of New South Wales (2015) 256 CLR 346; [2015] HCA 9 Dickson v R [2016] NSWCCA 105 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 243 FLR 28 Director of Public Prosecutions (Vic) v Dalgliesh (Pseudonym) (2017) 262 CLR 428; [2017] HCA 41 Elias v R (2013) 248 CLR 483; [2013] HCA 31 Green v R; Quinn v R (2011) 244 CLR 462; [2011] HCA 49 Hili v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520 Kerr v R [2016] NSWCCA 218 Le v R (Cth) [2010] NSWCCA 285 Markarian v R (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Milne v R [2012] NSWCCA 24; (2012) 219 A Crim R 237 Milne v R (2014) 252 CLR 149; [2014] HCA 4 Moodie v R [2020] NSWCCA 160 Obeid v R (2017) 96 NSWLR 155; [2017] NSWCCA 221 Oliver v R [2020] NSWCCA 26 R v Byrne [2010] QCA 33 R v Huang [2007] NSWCCA 259; (2007) 174 A Crim R 370 R v Issakidis [2018] NSWSC 378 R v Kilic (2016) 259 CLR 256; [2016] HCA 48 R v Kitson [2019] NSWSC 1109 R v Li [2010] NSWCCA 125; (2010) 202 A Crim R 195 R v Nguyen [2010] NSWCCA 226; (2010) 204 A Crim R 246 R v Pham (2015) 256 CLR 550; [2015] HCA 39 TAN v R (2011) 35 VR 109; [2011] VSCA 427 Trandy v R (2009) VSCA 321 Wong v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 584 Texts Cited: Nil Category: Principal judgment Parties: The Crown (Appellant) Simon Paul Anquetil (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: S Dowling SC with R Ranken (Appellant) P Strickland SC with P Lange (Respondent) Solicitors: Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (Appellant) Hanna Legal (Respondent) File Number(s): 2017/150658 Publication restriction: (1) Pursuant to s 7 of the Court Suppression and Non-publication Orders Act 2010 (NSW), the parts of these reasons for judgment which are marked as redacted on the file copy of the judgment initialled by the Chief Justice are not to be published (other than to the parties and their legal representatives) until further order of the Court.