NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Romano v R; Romano v R [2009] NSWCCA 63
HEARING DATE(S): 11 February 2009
JUDGMENT DATE: 13 March 2009
JUDGMENT OF: Grove J at 1; Blanch J at 66; Kirby J at 67
DECISION: Appeals dismissed.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE - Sentence - Offenders engaged in major cannabis cultivation - One offender engaged in two crops - Taking offence into account on Form 1 - Asserted errors by sentencing judge rejected - Parity - No particular point of principle - Sentences well within appropriate range
LEGISLATION CITED: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Attorney General's Application under s 37 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (No 1 of 2002) 2002 56 NSWLR 146 Lowe v The Queen (1984) 154 CLR 606 Postiglione v The Queen (1997) 189 CLR 295 R v Bavadra [2000] 115 A Crim R 152 CASES CITED : R v Morgan [1993] 70 A Crim R 368 R v Skorin [2005] NSWCCA 276 R v Sutton 2004 41 MVR 40 R v Thomson & Houlten (2000) 49 NSWLR 383 The Queen v Olbrich (1999) 199 CLR 270
Nicola ROMANO - Applicant PARTIES: Luigi ROMANO - Applicant REGINA - Respondent/Crown
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2007/3122; 2007/2955
A J Bellanto QC with J Ghabrial - Nicola Romano/Applicant COUNSEL: T A Game SC - Luigi Romano/Applicant P Miller - Crown/Respondent
Aldo Mexxanotte - Nicola Romano SOLICITORS: Angelo Bilias - Luigi Romano Solicitor for Public Prosecutions - Crown/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