NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Griffiths v R [2021] NSWCCA 226 Hearing dates: 23 August 2021 Date of orders: 24 September 2021 Decision date: 24 September 2021 Before: Payne JA; Garling J; Wright J Decision: (1) The applicant is granted leave to appeal on ground 1; (2) The appeal is allowed; (3) The orders made by Ellis DCJ on 31 October 2018 are quashed and in lieu thereof the offender is sentenced as follows: (a) an aggregate sentence of 10 years and 8 months is imposed, to date from 21 December 2016, expiring on 20 August 2027; (b) a non parole period of 5 years and 8 months is imposed, expiring on 20 August 2022; (c) the following indicative sentences are identified: (i) count 1: 3 years 9 months, with a non-parole period of 2 years 3 months; (ii) count 2: 6 years 9 months, with a non-parole period of 4 years; (iii) count 3: 7 years 6 months, with a non-parole period of 4 years; (iv) count 4: 9 years, with a non-parole period of 4 years and 4 months. Catchwords: CRIME — appeals — appeal against sentence — application for leave to appeal — whether irrelevant consideration taken into account — whether sentence was erroneously determined by reference to co-offender's sentence CRIME — drug offences — supply prohibited drug — commercial quantity Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 5, 53A Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5 Drugs Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW), ss 10, 24, 25, 25A, 36Z Cases Cited: Baladjam v R [2018] NSWCCA 304; (2018) 341 FLR 162 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 DL v The Queen (2018) 265 CLR 215; [2018] HCA 32 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 462; [2011] HCA 49 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Parente v R (2017) 96 NSWLR 633; [2017] NSWCCA 284 Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610; [1998] HCA 57 Robinson v R [2012] NSWCCA 26 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Kirt Wayne Griffiths (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: I Nash (Applicant) E Wilkins SC (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