NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Tidona v Regina [2005] NSWCCA 410
HEARING DATE(S): 22/11/2005
JUDGMENT DATE: 2 December 2005
JUDGMENT OF: Simpson J at 1; Adams J at 2; Hoeben J at 3
DECISION: Appeal upheld - applicant resentenced.
CATCHWORDS: Sentence Appeal - use of standard non-parole period when plea of guilty - error in using standard non-parole period as start point for calculation of sentence - taking into account prior convictions as an aggravating factor.
Crimes Act 1900 LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
Markarian v R [2005] 79 ALJR 1048 R v Fisher (1989) 40 A Crim R 442 R v Groat [2001] NSWCCA 452 R v Hofer [2001] NSWCCA 544 R v Johnson [2004] NSWCCA 76 R v McGouty [2002] NSWCCA 335 R v Misiepo [2005] NSWCCA 405 CASES CITED: R v Moffitt (1990) 20 NSWLR 114 R v P [2004] NSWCCA 218 R v Thomson and Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383 R v Way (2004) 60 NSWLR 168 R v Wickham [2004] NSWCCA 193 Ryan v The Queen (2001) 206 CLR 267 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1998) 164 CLR 465
Aurelio Tidona - Applicant PARTIES: Regina - Respondent
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2005/1319
Mr H Dhanji - Applicant COUNSEL: Mr P Ingram - Respondent
SE O'Connor, Solicitor for Legal Aid - Applicant SOLICITORS: S Kavanagh, Solicitor for Public Prosecutions - Respondent
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 03/21/3360
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