NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision : 163 A Crim R 381 66 NSWLR 566
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Regina v Darrell Terry McNaughton [2006] NSWCCA 242
HEARING DATE(S): 7 June 2006
JUDGMENT DATE: 11 August 2006
JUDGMENT OF: Spigelman CJ at 1; McClellan CJ at CL at 60; Grove J at 65; Barr J at 80; Bell J at 80
DECISION: 1 Leave to appeal granted; 2 Appeal dismissed.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal – Sentence – Aggravating factors – Prior criminal record – Whether relevant to objective circumstances of the offence – Whether sentencing judge erred by taking prior criminal record into account as aggravating factor – Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, s 22A(2)(d) - CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal – Sentence – Guilty Plea – Whether trial judge correctly assessed utilitarian value – Whether sentencing judge erred by considering weight of Crown case - CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal – Sentence – Whether sentencing judge erred by not taking into account fact that proceedings could have been dealt with in Local Court – Where not put to sentencing judge - CRIMINAL LAW – Appeal – Sentence – Whether sentence manifestly excessive
LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes Act 1900; s 59, 114(1)(d) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999; s21A
AB v The Queen (1999) 198 CLR 111 Baumer v The Queen (1988) 166 CLR 51 Bugmy v The Queen (1990) 169 CLR 525 Director of Public Prosecutions v Ottewell [1970] AC 642 Dixon v Pryce (1996) 135 FLR 27 Ellis v The Queen (2005) 154 A Crim R 450 GAS & SJK v The Queen (2004) 217 CLR 198 Hoare v The Queen (1998) 167 CLR 348 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 79 ALJR 1048 Marshall v Llewellyn (1995) 79 A Crim R 49 R v Baumer (1989) 40 A Crim R 74 R v Bellamy [2005] NSWCCA 329 R v Berg [2004] NSWCCA 300 R v Blair (2005) 152 A Crim R 462 R v Bushara [2006] NSWCCA 8 R v Doan (2000) 50 NSWLR 115 R v Dodd (1991) 57 A Crim R 349 R v Doolan [2006] NSWCCA 29 CASES CITED: R v El Masri [2005] NSWCCA 167 R v Hanslow [2004] NSWCCA 163 R v Hathaway [2005] NSWCCA 368 R v Johnson [2004] NSWCCA 76 R v McQueeney [2005] NSWCCA 168 R v Palmer [2005] NSWCCA 349 R v Ponfield (1999) 48 NSWLR 327 R v Royal [2003] NSWCCA 275 R v Shankley [2003] NSWCCA 253 R v Sutton [2004] NSWCCA 225 R v Thompson (2000) 49 NSWLR 383 R v Way (2004) 60 NSWLR 168 R v Whyte (2002) 55 NSWLR 252 R v Wickham [2004] NSWCCA 193 Sultan v Svikart (1989) 96 FLR 457 The Queen v Tyday [2006] NTSC 29 Veen v The Queen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465 Weininger v The Queen (2003) 212 CLR 629 Ziderman v Dental Council [1976] 1 WLR 330
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