NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Rampley v R [2010] NSWCCA 293
HEARING DATE(S): 24 September 2010
JUDGMENT DATE: 9 December 2010
JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJatCL at 1; Latham J at 40; Price J at 41
DECISION: Appeal dismissed
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - where criminality was of a very serious nature - where offender had a prominent mitigating case - whether the sentence was manifestly excessive - consideration of similar cases dealing with sexual activity offences - discussion of the purpose of the offence of using a carriage service to groom a person under 16 years of age - sentence within range and not manifestly excessive
LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Code 1995
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Burden [2005] QCA and Hays [2006] QCA Campbell [2004] QCA 342 DPP (Cth) v Hizhnikov [2008] VSCA 269 (Court of Appeal) R v Bozinovski (NSWDC 4 June 2009 unreported) R v Budd NSWDC, 2 October 2007 R v El Karhani (1990) 21 NSWLR 370 R v Gajjar [2008] VSCA 266 R v Holmes NSWDC CASES CITED : R v Kennings [2004] QCA 162 R v Lindsay (NSWDC 16 December 2009 unreported) R v O'Shana (ACTSC 1 August 2008, unreported) R v Paull (1990) 20 NSWLR 427 R v Porta NSWDC, 23 October 2007 R v Poynder [2007] NSWCCA 157 R v Shepheard [2008] ACTSC 116 R v Singh (NSWDC 19 May 2009 unreported) Tector [2008] NSWCCA 151 Western Australia v Collier (2007) 178 A Crim R 310
PARTIES: Warwick Martin Rampley (applicant) The Crown
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