WRIGHT v R [2006] NSWCCA 122

New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

CITATION: WRIGHT v R [2006] NSWCCA 122

HEARING DATE(S): 3 March 2006

JUDGMENT DATE: 13 April 2006

JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJ at CL at 1; Rothman J at 2; Smart AJ at 34

DECISION: BY MAJORITY (Rothman J dissenting); (i) Leave to appeal be granted; (ii) Appeal be dismissed.

CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - SENTENCING - Demand money with menaces - special circumstances - manifest excess - lower sentence not warranted

Crimes Act 1900 LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sententing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Appeal Act 1912

CASES CITED: Pearce v The Queen (1998) 194 CLR 610

PARTIES: A: Damien Vincent WRIGHT R: The Crown

FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2005/1569

COUNSEL: A: A Francis R: W Dawe QC

SOLICITORS: A: Steve O'Connor, Legal Aid Commission R: S Kavanagh, Public Prosecutions

LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court

LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): 04/21/3211

LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Marien SC DCJ

- 1 - IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL 2005/1569

McCLELLAN CJ at CL ROTHMAN J SMART AJ

13 April 2006 Damien Vincent WRIGHT v REGINA Judgment 1 McCLELLAN CJ at CL: I agree with Smart AJ. 2 ROTHMAN J: Damien Wright seeks leave to appeal his sentence. He was sentenced by his Honour Judge Marien SC at Campbelltown District Court on 24 January 2005 for six offences being offences for demanding money with menaces with intent to steal. His Honour imposed an overall effective sentence of three years' imprisonment as a non-parole period commencing 24 January 2005 and expiring on 23 January 2008 with a balance of term of one year expiring on 23 January 2009. 3 There are two grounds of appeal: that the sentencing judge erred by failing to give effect to the finding of special circumstances; and, secondly, that the sentence is manifestly excessive. Before dealing with each of these grounds of sentence it is necessary to set out the facts giving rise to the offences and the remarks of the sentencing judge insofar as relevant. Lastly, if error is shown, the Court needs to deal with the question of whether a lesser sentence is warranted.