NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Peters v R [2013] NSWCCA 324 Hearing dates: 29 October 2013 Decision date: 20 December 2013 Before: Latham J at 1 RA Hulme J at 94 Barr AJ at 95 Decision: 1.Leave to appeal against sentence granted 2.Appeal dismissed Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW - application seeking leave to appeal sentence - plea of guilty - aggravated break, enter and detain for advantage - applicant secured box allegedly containing explosives around neck of school student in her home in extortion attempt - whether trial judge erred in approach to applicant's mental illness - whether applicant's psychiatric condition causally related to offending conduct - whether House v The King error - whether Muldrock error - whether trial judge failed to make a finding regarding prospects of rehabilitation - whether trial judge erred in failing to make a finding of special circumstances - whether sentence manifestly excessive - sentence not plainly unjust - leave to appeal granted - appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Cases Cited: DPP (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 Aoun v R [2011] NSWCCA 284 Courtney v R [2007] NSWCCA 195 Devaney v R [2012] NSWCCA 285 DPP v JG [2010] NSWCCA 222 ; 220 A Crim R 19 Furia v Regina [2010] NSWCCA 326 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499 Jiang v R [2010] NSWCCA 277 Lauritsen v The Queen (2000) 22 WAR 442; 114 A Crim R 333 Leach v R [2008] NSWCCA 73 Louizos v R [2009] NSWCCA 71 ; 194 A Crim R 223 Michael v R [2011] NSWCCA 122 Miller v The Queen [1999] WASCA 66 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39 ; 244 CLR 120 R v Choi [2010] NSWCCA 318 R v Cramp [2004] NSWCCA 264 R v O'Donoghue (1988) 34 A Crim R 397 R v Engert (1995) 84 A Crim R 67 R v Fidow [2004] NSWCCA 172 R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255 R v Israil [2002] NSWCCA 255 R v Louizos [2009] NSWCCA 71 ; 194 A Crim R 223 R v O'Donoghue (1988) 34 A Crim R 392 R v Ramea [2013] NSWCCA 310 R v Stott [2005] NSWCCA 36 Tattersall v R [2011] NSWCCA 282 WW v R [2012] NSWCCA 165 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Paul Douglas Peters - (Applicant) Regina - (Crown Respondent) Representation: Counsel T Game SC - (Applicant) P Ingram SC - (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