NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Hanna v R [2015] NSWCCA 326 Hearing dates: 2 December 2015 Decision date: 18 December 2015 Before: Leeming JA at [1] Johnson J at [2] R A Hulme J at [126] Decision: 1. The tender of the additional evidence relied upon by the Applicant in support of Ground 2 is rejected. 2. Leave to appeal is granted. 3. The appeal is dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing – Applicant pleaded guilty to a number of drug supply offences and sentenced to aggregate term of imprisonment for five years with a non-parole period of three years – Applicant suffers from significant physical disabilities and depression – whether sentencing Judge failed to sufficiently take into account Applicant's physical disabilities or depression – open to sentencing Judge to take into account Applicant's physical and mental conditions in the way that he did – whether sentencing process miscarried as a result of an incorrect understanding of the extent and future physical effects of the Applicant's physical condition at time of sentence – additional evidence sought to be admitted on appeal – whether miscarriage of justice occasioned by absence of additional evidence at first instance – tender of additional evidence rejected – whether sentence manifestly excessive – sentence not unreasonable or plainly unjust – appeal dismissed Legislation Cited: Criminal Appeal Act 1912 Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 Cases Cited: Achurch v R (No. 2) [2013] NSWCCA 117; 84 NSWLR 328 Achurch v The Queen [2014] HCA 10; 253 CLR 141 Bland v R [2014] NSWCCA 82; 241 A Crim R 51 Dinsdale v The Queen [2000] HCA 54; 202 CLR 321 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194; 79 NSWLR 1 Grant v R [2014] NSWCCA 67 Inglesias v R [2006] NSWCCA 261 Khoury v R [2011] NSWCCA 118; 209 A Crim R 509 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 R v Achurch [2011] NSWCCA 186; 216 A Crim R 152 R v CBK [2002] NSWCCA 457; 135 A Crim R 260 R v GWM [2012] NSWCCA 240 Turkmani v R [2014] NSWCCA 186 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Raymond Hanna (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: Mr MC Ramage QC (Applicant) Mr H Baker (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