R v Warman [2001] NSWCCA 147

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : R v Warman [2001] NSWCCA 147 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60481/00 HEARING DATE(S) : 18 April 2001 JUDGMENT DATE : 18 April 2001

PARTIES : Regina Mark Wayne Warman JUDGMENT OF : Wood CJ at CL at 1; Sully J at 15

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 00/211/1028 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Robison DCJ OFFICER :

COUNSEL : Crown: M. Marien Applicant: D. Jordan SOLICITORS : S E O'Connor D J Humphreys CATCHWORDS : CRIMINAL LAW - appeals - appeal against sentence - robbery - worst category of offence - subjective circumstances - timely plea - whether sentence manifestly excessive CASES CITED: Crimes Act 1900 s 94 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 s 32 DECISION : Leave to appeal granted; Appeal dismissed

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL

No. 60345 of 2000

WOOD CJ at CL SULLY J 18 April 2001 Regina v Mark Wayne WARMAN

The applicant pleaded guilty to one count of robbery pursuant to s 94 Crimes Act 1900. A further 12 offences were also taken into account on a Form 1. He was sentenced to imprisonment for seven years with a non-parole period of four years.

The applicant appeals against the sentence imposed on the grounds that it was manifestly excessive in that (1) the case did not fall into the worst category for the offence; (2) insufficient weight was given to the timely plea of guilty or to the applicant's remorse and rehabilitation.

HELD: (Appeal dismissed):

Ground 1: case did not fall into the worst category The present offence was properly categorised as serious in light of the applicant's prior record and obvious pre-meditation. Robbery is regarded as a serious offence and considerations of deterrence are of special importance. In this case the victim was in a vulnerable position and as such he was entitled to be protected by a consistently firm stand on sentencing.