AA v R [2024] NSWCCA 132

Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: AA v R [2024] NSWCCA 132 Hearing dates: 1 July 2024 Date of orders: 19 July 2024 Decision date: 19 July 2024 Before: Ward P and Wilson J at [1] Dhanji J at [13] Decision: (1) Grant leave to appeal. (2) Dismiss the appeal. Catchwords: CRIME – appeals – appeal against sentence – severity appeal – ongoing sexual offending by applicant against his stepdaughters – extremely serious offending – totality considerations – principles in Mill v The Queen – whether aggregate sentence is affected by erroneous sentence indicated for particular count – whether error had the capacity to influence the aggregate sentence – where not possible to conclude error could not have affected the aggregate sentence – sentencing discretion exercised afresh – regard to conditions experienced by persons in custody – applicant's subjective case – extremely deprived upbringing – lengthy criminal history – where applicant on conditional liberty at the time of offending – where no lesser sentence other than that imposed by the sentencing judge is warranted – leave to appeal granted – appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 61M, 66A Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6, s 5(1)(c) Crimes (Domestic and Personal Violence Act) 2007 (NSW), s 13 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), s 21B Cases Cited: AJ v R [2023] NSWCCA 158 Benn v R [2023] NSWCCA 24 Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 C v R (2013) 229 A Crim R 223; [2013] NSWCCA 81 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Harris v R [2023] NSWCCA 44 Hoare v The Queen (1989) 167 CLR 348; [1989] HCA 33 Hoskins v R [2021] NSWCCA 169 Ibrahim v R [2022] NSWCCA 134 JM v R [2014] NSWCCA 297 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Lee v R [2023] NSWCCA 70 Lloyd v R [2022] NSWCCA 18 Lodhi v R (2007) 179 A Crim R 470; [2007] NSWCCA 360 Mill v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 59; [1988] HCA 70 Munda v Western Australia (2013) 249 CLR 600; [2013] HCA 38 Newman (a pseudonym) v R [2019] NSWCCA 157 PN v R [2024] NSWCCA 86 R v Gavel [2014] NSWCCA 56 R v Mostyn (2004) 145 A Crim R 304; [2004] NSWCCA 97 R v Totten [2003] NSWCCA 207 Standen v Regina (2015) 253 A Crim R 301; [2015] NSWCCA 211 The King v Hatahet [2024] HCA 23 The Queen v Kilic (2016) 259 CLR 256; [2016] HCA 48 The Queen v Shrestha (1991) 173 CLR 48; [1991] HCA 26 Veen (No 2) v The Queen (1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14 WAP v R [2017] NSWCCA 212 Young (a pseudonym) v R [2021] NSWCCA 163 Category: Principal judgment Parties: AA (Applicant) Rex (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: T Ramrakha (Applicant) J Styles (Respondent)