NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Longworth v R [2017] NSWCCA 119 Hearing dates: 7 March 2017 Date of orders: 02 June 2017 Decision date: 02 June 2017 Before: Macfarlan JA at [1]; Harrison J at [54]; Schmidt J at [55] Decision: Application for leave to appeal dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentencing – recklessly causing grievous bodily harm – aggravating and mitigating factors – victim a security guard who had refused the applicant entry to a licenced premises – whether the victim was 'vulnerable' for the purposes of section 21A(2)(l) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) – consideration of vulnerability arising by reason of a person's occupation – consideration of sections 73, 74 and 77 of the Liquor Act 2007 (NSW) – victim was vulnerable in the relevant sense
CRIMINAL LAW – appeal against sentence – leave to appeal – delay resulting from need for committal proceedings – applicant convicted after trial by jury – applicant had made an early offer to plead guilty to the only offence of which he was convicted – whether sentencing judge erred in failing to take delay into account
CRIMINAL LAW – appeal against sentence – leave to appeal – recklessly causing grievous bodily harm – whether sentencing judge failed to take into account applicant's mental condition – whether sentence manifestly excessive Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 33(1)(b), 35(2) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 21A(2)(l), 21A(2)(n) Liquor Act 2007 (NSW), ss 73, 74, 77 Cases Cited: Aloniu v R [2017] NSWCCA 74 Arnold v R [2011] NSWCCA 150 Barbaro v The Queen (2014) 253 CLR 58; [2014] HCA 2 Blackwell v R [2012] NSWCCA 227 Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37 Campbell-Stephen v Regina [2010] NSWCCA 204 Daniels v R [2016] NSWCCA 35 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Dosen v R [2010] NSWCCA 283 Fahda v R [1999] NSWCCA 267 Hona v R [2016] NSWCCA 119 Hili v The Queen (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 R v Dungay [2012] NSWCCA 197 R v Kilic (2016) 91 ALJR 131; [2016] HCA 48 R v Loveridge (2014) 243 A Crim R 31; [2014] NSWCCA 120 R v Tadrosse (2005) 65 NSWLR 740; [2005] NSWCCA 145 Reberger v R [2011] NSWCCA 132 Sabra v R [2015] NSWCCA 38 Stokes v The Queen (2008) 185 A Crim R 74; [2008] NSWCCA 123 Wong v The Queen (2001) 207 CLR 589; [2001] HCA 64 Category: Principal judgment Parties: James Ian Longworth (Applicant) Regina (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: H Dhanji SC (Applicant) N Adams (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