NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Beale v R [2015] NSWCCA 120 Hearing dates: 20 May 2015 Date of orders: 29 May 2015 Decision date: 29 May 2015 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1] R A Hulme J at [2] Beech-Jones J at [6] Decision: (1) Leave to appeal be granted; and
(2) The appeal be dismissed. Catchwords: SENTENCE APPEAL – two serious home invasions – seven offences – aggregate sentence imposed – whether sentencing judge attributed "moral responsibility" for all acts of participants in joint criminal enterprise to the applicant – approach to sentencing where evidence does not enable differentiation between participants in joint criminal enterprise – risk of institutionalisation – special circumstances – whether sentencing judge erred in not finding special circumstances even though applicant institutionalised – totality – alleged error in failing to have adequate regard to totality – whether aggregate sentence manifestly excessive.
HELD: no error shown – leave to appeal granted but appeal dismissed. Legislation Cited: - Crimes Act 1900 – s 86; s 97, s 105A, s 112, s 113, s 154F, s 195A - Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 – s 44, s 53A Cases Cited: - AB v R [2014] NSWCCA 31 - Behman v R [2014] NSWCCA 239 - Cullen v R, [[2014] NSWCCA 162 - House v R [1936] HCA 40; 55 CLR 499 - Jackson v R [2010] NSWCCA 162 - Jinnette v R [2012] NSWCCA 217 - JM v R [2014] NSWCCA 297 - KR v R [2012] NSWCCA 32 - Markarian v R [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 - Martin v R [2014] NSWCCA 124 - Mill v R [1988] HCA 70; 166 CLR 59 - Pearce v R [1998] HCA 57; 194 CLR 610 - PD v R [2012] NSWCCA 242 - R v Brown [2012] NSWCCA 199 - R v Carter [2003] NSWCCA 243 - R v JW [2010] NSWCCA 49 - R v Olbrich [1999] HCA 54; 199 CLR 270 - R v Simpson [2001] NSWCCA 534; 53 NSWLR 704 - R v Sukkar [2011] NSWCCA 140 - R v Tuuta [2014] NSWCCA 40 - R v Wright [2009] NSWCCA 3 - RL v R [2015] NSWCCA 106 - SHR v R [2014] NSWCCA 94 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Dwayne Beale – Applicant Director of Public Prosecutions – Respondent Representation: Counsel: C.J. Bruce SC – Applicant Ms S. Dowling SC – 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