NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: KELLY v THE QUEEN [2007] NSWCCA 357
HEARING DATE(S): 11 December 2007
JUDGMENT DATE: 18 December 2007
JUDGMENT OF: Basten JA at 1; Barr J at 37; Adams J at 38
(1) Leave to appeal granted. DECISION: (2) Appeal dismissed.
CRIMINAL LAW – appeal from sentence – whether sentence manifestly excessive – principle of parsimony – legitimate range of sentences – exercise of discretion of sentencing judge – Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6(3)
CATCHWORDS: SENTENCING – whether sentence manifestly excessive – principle of parsimony – legitimate range of sentences – exercise of discretion of sentencing judge – Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6(3)
WORDS & PHRASES – sentence "warranted in law"
Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 4, 112, 195 LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 6 Criminal Appeal Rules, r 3B
DB v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 27 CASES CITED: House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Webb v O'Sullivan [1952] SASR 65
PARTIES: Robert KELLY – Appellant The Queen – Respondent
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2007/5296
COUNSEL: A Francis – Appellant M Barr - Respondent
SOLICITORS: S E O'Connor (Legal Aid Commission) – Appellant S Kavanagh (Solicitor for Public Prosecutions) - Respondent
LOWER COURT JURISDICTION: District Court
LOWER COURT FILE NUMBER(S): DC 06/31/0413
LOWER COURT JUDICIAL OFFICER: Garling DCJ
LOWER COURT DATE OF DECISION: 7 December 2006
IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEAL CCA 2006/5296 DC 06/31/0413
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