NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION : Clegg v Regina [2002] NSWCCA 394 FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA 60833/02 HEARING DATE(S) : 23 September 2002 JUDGMENT DATE : 23 September 2002
PARTIES : Kevin Daniel CLEGG - Applicant Regina JUDGMENT OF : Buddin J at 19; Smart AJ at 1
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION : District Court LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S) : 98/21/2036 LOWER COURT JUDICIAL Armitage DCJ OFFICER :
COUNSEL : C.B. Craigie SC - Applicant P. Barrett - Crown SOLICITORS : Sydney Regional Aboriginal Corporation Legal Service - Applicant S.E. O'Connor - Crown CATCHWORDS : Sentencing - accumulation of sentences - need to give effect to totality principle - longer non-parole period required DECISION : see paras 18.
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 60833/02 BUDDIN J SMART AJ Monday, 23 September 2002 REGINA v KEVIN DANIEL CLEGG JUDGMENT
1. SMART AJ: The applicant, Kevin Daniel Clegg, seeks leave to appeal against a sentence of imprisonment for twelve months to date from 31 March 2004 with a non-parole period of nine months imposed by Armitage DCJ on 15 November 2001 for breach of recognisance in respect of the offence of accessory after the fact to robbery being armed with an offensive weapon.
2. On 21 October 1999 O'Reilly DCJ sentenced the applicant on a count of robbery in company to eighteen months periodic detention. On the count of accessory after the fact the applicant was placed on a bond to be of good behaviour for three years. The offence of drive whilst disqualified was taken into account on the robbery in company count.
3. Unfortunately, the applicant committed further offences on 8 December 1999. On 10 March 2000 the District Court, on appeal, (Goldring DCJ) on the offence of drive whilst disqualified sentenced the applicant to periodic detention for a minimum term of fifteen months with an additional term of three months. This ultimately became a sentence of one year six months and twenty-eight days commencing on 22 March 2000 with a non-parole period of fifteen months expiring on 11 October 2001 due to penalties for non-compliance with the requirements of periodic detention.
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