NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: R v McEvoy [2010] NSWCCA 110
HEARING DATE(S): 9 February 2010
JUDGMENT DATE: 21 May 2010
JUDGMENT OF: Grove J at 1; Simpson J at 2; RA Hulme J at 116
DECISION: Crown appeal dismissed
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW – particular offences – supply prohibited drug – possess prohibited weapon without permit – malicious wounding with intent to cause grievous bodily harm - CRIMINAL LAW – Crown appeal against sentence – standard non-parole period – finding with respect to mid-range of objective seriousness – degree of specificity required – sentence in respect of malicious wounding offence manifestly inadequate – failure to accumulate in respect of firearms offence - CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing – discretion not to intervene where re-sentencing would interfere with rehabilitation process – appeal dismissed
Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 Criminal Appeal Act 1912
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
R v AJP [2004] NSWCCA 434; (2004) 150 A Crim R 575 R v Burgess [2006] NSWCCA 319 R v Carroll [2010] NSWCCA 55 R v Cheh [2009] NSWCCA 134 CASES CITED : R v JW [2010] NSWCCA 49 R v Knight; R v Biuvanua [2007] NSWCCA 283; (2007) 176 A Crim R 338 R v Mitchell; R v Gallagher [2007] NSWCCA 296; (2007) 177 A Crim R 94 R v Thomson; R v Houlton [2000] NSWCCA 309; (2000) 49 NSWLR 383 R v Wall [2002] NSWCCA 42 R v Way [2004] NSWCCA 131; (2004) 60 NSWLR 168
PARTIES: Regina (Applicant) Christopher James McEvoy (Respondent)
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