Rawat v R [2024] NSWCCA 64

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Rawat v R [2024] NSWCCA 64 Hearing dates: 15 April 2024 Date of orders: 8 May 2024 Decision date: 08 May 2024 Before: Wright J at [1]; Chen J at [2]; McNaughton J at [69] Decision: (1) Grant leave to the applicant to appeal against the sentence imposed on 22 August 2023. (2) Dismiss the appeal against the sentence. Catchwords: CRIME – appeals – appeals against sentence – manifest excess – alleged error in the finding of the sentencing judge that the applicant had a lack of understanding of issues relating to consent – where applicant pleaded guilty to one count of sexual touching – where sentencing judge found that an ICO was technically available but would not sufficiently serve the purposes of sentencing, in particular, victim vindication, retribution and general deterrence – no error in factual finding established – manifest excess not established – leave to appeal granted – appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW) Cases Cited: AB v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 111; [1999] HCA 46 Aktar v The Queen [2015] NSWCCA 123; (2015) 251 A Crim R 376 Amante v R [2020] NSWCCA 34 Baines v R [2016] NSWCCA 132 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Geraghty v R [2023] NSWCCA 47 Hili v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45 Jalloh v R [2009] NSWCCA 295 Jiang v R [2010] NSWCCA 277 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665; [1999] HCA 29 Moodie v The Queen [2020] NSWCCA 160; (2020) 284 A Crim R 87 R v Harris [2015] NSWCCA 81; (2015) 70 MVR 412 R v Qin [2008] NSWCCA 189 Salmond v R [2010] NSWCCA 141 Sharma v R [2010] NSWCCA 338 Smith v R [2020] NSWCCA 181; (2020) 93 MVR 345 Taitoko v R [2020] NSWCCA 43 Wong v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 584; [2001] HCA 64 Wright v R [2019] NSWCCA 134 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Rakesh Singh Rawat (Applicant) Rex (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: A Norrie (Applicant) V Garrity (Respondent)