Regina v Paul LANG [2003] NSWCCA 68

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION : Regina v Paul LANG [2003] NSWCCA 68 revised - 4/04/2003 HEARING DATE(S) : 21/03/03 JUDGMENT DATE : 21 March 2003

JUDGMENT OF : Studdert J at 16; Shaw J at 1 DECISION : Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

CATCHWORDS : Criminal law - sentence - appeal - parity - co-offenders sentenced in Children's Court - appeal dismissed LEGISLATION CITED : Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606; Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 198 CLR 295; R v AO [2003] NSWCCA 43; CASES CITED : R v Boney [2001] NSWCCA 432 R v Colgan [1999] NSWCCA 292; R v Rushby [1999] NSWCCA 104; R v Steel (Unreported, NSWCCA, 17 April 1997) R v Tran [1999] NSWCCA 109 PARTIES : REGINA v PAUL LANG FILE NUMBER(S) : CCA No 60170 of 2002 COUNSEL : Crown: R. Hulme, SC App: Ms A. Francis SOLICITORS : Crown: S.E. O'Connor App: D.J. Humpreys

LOWER COURT District Court JURISDICTION : LOWER COURT 02/21/0279; 01/21/0314 FILE NUMBER(S) : LOWER COURT Nield DCJ JUDICIAL OFFICER :

IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 60170 of 2002

Studdert J Shaw J

21 March 2003 Regina v Paul LANG Judgment 1 Shaw J: In this case, his Honour Judge Nield sentenced the applicant to a an overall effective sentence of four years and six months with a non parole period of two years and three months for an offence of robbery and four other offences of robbery in company. For the first offence the applicant was sentenced to a fixed term of one year, one month and two weeks commencing on 30 January 2002 and expiring on 14 March 2003. For each of the robbery in company charges the applicant received a head sentence of three years and nine months with a non parole period of eighteen months partly accumulated upon the first sentence. The first date the applicant is currently eligible for release on parole is 29 April 2004. 2 As the Crown submissions point out this sentence is 'unremarkable' and could not be seen as excessive. 3 However, the applicant submits that there is a disparity in the sentences imposed upon him in relation to more lenient sentences imposed upon his co-offenders in the Children's Court. Those co-offenders were sentenced to control orders of 15 months with non parole periods of nine months. 4 The short question for this Court is whether the applicant could be said to suffer a justifiable sense of grievance at this disparity: Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606; Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 198 CLR 295. 5 However, the Crown points to a number of salient distinguishing features between the present applicant and the co-offenders that indicate that the offenders were not in the same position. In particular: