NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: Ng v R (Cth) [2010] NSWCCA 232
HEARING DATE(S): 13 August 2010
JUDGMENT DATE: 14 October 2010
JUDGMENT OF: McClellan CJatCL at 1; Hulme J at 28; Davies J at 31
DECISION: Grant leave to appeal but dismiss the appeal.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW - whether the sentence imposed upon the applicant was manifestly excessive - assessment of the criminality of the applicant - whether the sentencing judge erred in the applicability of comparable cases - relevance of applicant's prior convictions in assessing prospects of rehabilitation
LEGISLATION CITED: Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Bernier v R (1998) 102 A Crim R 44 Director of Public Prosecutions v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 R v Jain [2004] VSCA 20 R v Liu [2005] NSWCCA 378 R v Ong [2007] VSCA 206; (2007) 176 A Crim R 366 CASES CITED : R v Otto [2005] NSWCCA 333; (2005) 157 A Crim R 525 R v SC [2008] NSWCCA 29 R v Spiteri [1999] NSWCCA 3 R v Studenikin [2004] NSWCCA 164 R v Tyler and Chalmers [2007] NSWCCA 247; (2007) 173 A Crim R 458 R v Wong & Leung (1999) 48 NSWLR 340 Speer v R [2004] NSWCCA 118
PARTIES: Chin Swee Ng (Applicant) The Crown (Cth)
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2009/4599
COUNSEL: S Kluss (Applicant) N Adams (Crown)
SOLICITORS: Greenfield Lawyers (Applicant) Commonwealth Director of Public Prosecutions (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