Macdonald v R (Sentence) [2023] NSWCCA 253

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Macdonald v R (Sentence) [2023] NSWCCA 253 Hearing dates: 6 June 2023 Date of orders: 6 October 2023 Decision date: 06 October 2023 Before: Bell CJ at [1]; Basten AJA at [2]; Button J at [111] Decision: (1) Grant leave to appeal with respect to grounds 4 and 5 in the applicant's amended notice of appeal. (2) Dismiss the appeal with respect to grounds 4 and 5. (3) Otherwise refuse leave to appeal. Catchwords: CRIME – appeals – appeal against sentence – conspiracy to commit misconduct in public office – common law offence – choice of comparable sentences – whether sentence manifestly excessive SENTENCING – common law offence with no maximum penalty – use of statutory analogues for guidance – whether statutory offences in other jurisdictions provide guidance as to unexpressed intention of local State legislature – whether sentencing judge failed to give appropriate weight to proposed Commonwealth analogue – whether obligation to explain departure from proposed analogue SENTENCING – challenge as to fact finding on sentence – whether sentencing in a circumstantial case must rely only on facts established beyond reasonable doubt – observations as to standard of review of assertion of mistaken facts Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), Pt 4A, s 249B Crimes Act 1958 (Vic), s 320 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 3A, 5, 21A, Pt 4, Div 1A Table Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5 Criminal Code (Cth), s 142.2 Criminal Code (Qld), s 87 Evidence Act 1995 (Cth), s 21 State Records Act 1998 (NSW), s 21 Cases Cited: Blackstock v Regina [2013] NSWCCA 172 Carroll v The Queen [2009] HCA 13; 83 ALJR 579 Cheung v The Queen (2001) 209 CLR 1; [2001] HCA 67 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54 Esso Australia Resources Ltd v Federal Commissioner of Taxation (Cth) (1999) 201 CLR 49; [1999] HCA 67 Ex parte Attorney-General (Qld) (2011) 209 A Crim R 538 Forrest v Wilson (2017) 262 CLR 510; [2017] HCA 30 Hordern v R [2019] NSWCCA 138 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Jackson v R; Hakim v R (1988) 33 A Crim R 413 Jaturawong v Regina [2011] NSWCCA 168 Maitland v R; Macdonald v R (2019) 99 NSWLR 376; [2019] NSWCCA 32 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Mulato v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 282 Obeid v R (2017) 96 NSWLR 155; [2017] NSWCCA 221 Queen v Kilic (2016) 259 CLR 256; [2016] HCA 48 Queen v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270; [1999] HCA 54 R v Hokin, Burton and Peisely (1922) 22 SR (NSW) 280 R v Isaacs (1997) 41 NSWLR 374 R v Macdonald [2023] NSWSC 270 R v Nuttall; ex parte Attorney-General (Qld) (2011) 209 A Crim R 538; [2011] QCA 120 R v Obeid (No 12) [2016] NSWSC 1815 R v O'Donoghue (1988) 34 A Crim R 397 R v White (1875) 13 SCR (NSW) 322 Wong v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 584; [2001] HCA 64 Wood v R [2019] NSWCCA 309 Zreika v R (2012) 223 A Crim R 460; [2012] NSWCCA 44 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Ian Michael Macdonald (Applicant) The Crown (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: C Parkin (Applicant) E Nicholson / N Wootton (Respondent)