NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Lazarus v R [2023] NSWCCA 214 Hearing dates: 15 May 2023 Date of orders: 30 August 2023 Decision date: 30 August 2023 Before: Beech-Jones CJ at CL at [1] Ierace J at [7] Cavanagh J at [8] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal is granted. (2) The appeal is dismissed. Catchwords: CRIME — Appeals — Appeal against sentence — Application for leave to appeal – possession of child abuse material – specific deterrence – general deterrence – sentencing factors – applicant resentenced – no lesser sentenced warranted Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1914 (Cth), ss 3, 16A(2), 16BA Criminal Code (Cth), ss 474.19(1), 474.22(1), 474.22A(1), 474.26(1), 474.27A(1) Cases Cited: Assheton v R (2002) 132 A Crim R 237; [2002] WASCA 209 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v D'Alessandro (2010) 26 VR 477; [2010] VSCA 60 Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) (Cth) v Beattie (2017) 270 A Crim R 556; [2017] NSWCCA 301 Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) (Cth) v Garside (2016) 50 VR 800; [2016] VSCA 74 Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) (Cth) v Guest [2014] VSCA 29 Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) (Cth) v Watson (2016) 259 A Crim R 327; [2016] VSCA 73 Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) (Cth) v Zarb (2014) 247 A Crim R 225; [2014] VSCA 347 Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP) v D'Alessandro (2010) 26 VR 477; [2010] VSCA 60 DL v R (2018) 265 CLR 215; [2018] HCA 32 Fitzgerald v R [2015] NSWCCA 266 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 R v Booth [2009] NSWCCA 89 R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 R v Gent (2005) 162 A Crim R 29; [2005] NSWCCA 370 R v Jones (1999) 108 A Crim R 50; [1999] WASCA 24 R v Porte (2015) 252 A Crim R 294; [2015] NSWCCA 174 Totaan v R (2022) 108 NSWLR 17; [2022] NSWCCA 75 Turnbull v R [2019] NSWCCA 97 Wong v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 584; [2001] HCA 64 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Gerard Daniel Lazarus (Applicant) Rex (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: C O'Neill (Applicant) A Chhabra and J Fennel (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