NSW Caselaw
New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
CITATION: PENFOLD v R; WARD v R [2010] NSWCCA 61
HEARING DATE(S): 9 February 2010
JUDGMENT DATE: 13 April 2010
JUDGMENT OF: Grove J at 1; Simpson J at 104; RA Hulme J at 105
DECISION: In each appeal, leave to appeal against sentence granted and appeal dismissed.
CATCHWORDS: CRIMINAL LAW AND PROCEDURE - Sentence - Robbery whilst armed - Two victims - Extremely serious injury to one victim - Co-offenders - Different roles - No error by sentencing judge in application of principles - Assessments within range of discretion - Grounds raising no particular point of principle
CATEGORY: Principal judgment
Attorney General's Application under s 37 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (2002) 56 NSWLR 146 Fahs v R [2007] NSWCCA 26 GAS & SJK v The Queen (2004) 217 CLR 198 Ibbs v The Queen (1987) 163 CLR 447 R v Cahyadi [2007] NSWCCA 1; (2007) 168 A Crim R 41 R v Frazer & Spencer [2007] NSWSC 1449 R v Henry (1999) 46 NSWLR 346 CASES CITED : R v Mostyn (2004) 145 A Crim R 304 R v Mungomery (2004) 151 A Crim R 376 R v Sotheren [2001] NSWCCA 425 R v Thomson & Houlton (2000) 49 NSWLR 383 R v Way (2004) 60 NSWLR 168 R v Wright [2009] NSWCCA 3 Tatana v R [2006] NSWCCA 398 The Queen v Veen (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 485 Vaovasa v The Queen (2007) 174 A Crim R 116
Kenneth John PENFOLD - Applicant PARTIES: Brendan WARD - Applicant REGINA - Crown/Respondent
FILE NUMBER(S): CCA 2007/12644; 2007/8834
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