NSW Caselaw
Reported Decision: 191 A Crim R 409
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: R v AD [2008] NSWCCA 289
HEARING DATE(S): 24 September 2008
JUDGMENT DATE: 9 December 2008
JUDGMENT OF: Beazley JA at 1; Hislop J at 2; Harrison J at 3
1. Appeal allowed. 2. The sentences imposed in respect of Counts 1, 2 and 3 are quashed and in lieu thereof the respondent is re-sentenced on those counts as follows: DECISION: (a) On Count 1 sentence the respondent to a fixed term of 4 years and 6 months from 8 February 2008 to expire on 7 August 2012; (b) On Count 2 sentence the respondent to a non-parole period of 6 years from 8 February 2009 to expire on 7 February 2015 with a balance of term of 3 years and 6 months from 8 February 2015 to expire on 7 August 2018; and (c) On Count 3 sentence the respondent to a fixed term of 2 years and 6 months from 8 November 2012 to expire on 7 May 2015.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – SENTENCING – Crown Appeal – manifest inadequacy of sentence – manufacture and supply of prohibited drugs – offences committed while on parole – sentences imposed to be served concurrently – whether structuring of sentences failed to reflect number and objective seriousness of offences – whether sentences inappropriately backdated - whether trial judge erred in double counting mitigating factors including early guilty pleas and provision of assistance to authorities - appeal allowed – sentences on three counts quashed - new sentences imposed
LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Appeal Act 1912
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Callaghan v R [2006] NSWCCA 58 Dinsdale v The Queen [2000] HCA 54; (2000) 202 CLR 321 Kauwenberghs v R (Cth) [2008] NSWCCA 98 Lu v Regina [2008] NSWCCA 261 R v Ceissman [2004] NSWCCA 466 R v Gorman [2002] NSWCCA 516; (2002) 137 A Crim R 326 R v Jones (Court of Criminal Appeal, 30 June 1994, unreported) R v MAK, R v MSK [2006] NSWCCA 381; (2008) 167 A Crim R 159 R v McNaughton [2006] NSWCCA 242; (2006) 66 NSWLR 566 R v Misiepo [2005] NSWCCA 405 R v MMK [2006] NSWCCA 272; (2006) 164 A Crim R 481 R v Moffitt (1990) 20 NSWLR 114 CASES CITED : R v Porteous [2005] NSWCCA 115 R v Readman (1990) 47 A Crim R 181 R v Richards (1981) 2 NSWLR 464 R v Smith & Jones [2001] NSWCCA 279 R v Tran [1999] NSWCCA 109 R v Wall [2002] NSWCCA 42 R v WAQA [2005] NSWCCA 33; (2005) 156 A Crim R 454 R v Wheeler [2000] NSWCCA 34 R v WHS (Court of Criminal Appeal, 27 March 1995, unreported) R v Z [2006] NSWCCA 342; 167 A Crim R 436 S v R [2008] NSWCCA 186 SZ v R [2007] NSWCCA 19; (2007) A Crim R 249 Veen v The Queen (No 2) [1988] HCA 14; (1988) 164 CLR 465
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