NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Biddle v R [2017] NSWCCA 128 Hearing dates: 17 May 2017 Date of orders: 14 June 2017 Decision date: 14 June 2017 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL at [1] Rothman J at [114] Price J at [126] Decision: (1) Grant an extension of time for the bringing of the application for leave to appeal against sentence. (2) Grant leave to appeal against sentence. (3) Dismiss the appeal. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – sentence appeal – murder – estranged husband beat wife to death with a metal bar – sentence of imprisonment for 27 years with non-parole period of 18 years – whether sentencing judge correctly considered objective seriousness – whether applicant's mental impairment and intellectual functioning adequately considered – whether factual findings as to causal connection between offending and mental condition open to sentencing judge – whether actions of offender facilitated the administration of justice – whether sentence manifestly excessive – no error identified – appeal dismissed. Legislation Cited: Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) – ss 3A, 21A, 22A Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – s 5(1)(c) Cases Cited: AB v R [2014] NSWCCA 339 Alkanaan v Regina [2017] NSWCCA 56 Aslan v R [2014] NSWCCA 114 Cowan v R [2015] NSWCCA 118 Devaney v R [2012] NSWCCA 285 Elturk v R [2014] NSWCCA 61 Goodridge v R [2014] NSWCCA 37 House v R (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Kentwell v The Queen [2014] HCA 37; 252 CLR 601 Martin v R [2015] NSWCCA 6 McLaren v Regina [2012] NSWCCA 284 Muldrock v The Queen [2011] HCA 39; 244 CLR 120 Mulvihill v R [2016] NSWCCA 259 Munda v State of Western Australia [2013] HCA 38; 249 CLR 600 R v Archer [2015] NSWSC 1487 R v Biddle [2011] NSWSC 1262 R v O'Donohue (1988) 34 A Crim R 397 The Queen v Kilic [2016] HCA 48; 91 ALJR 131 Turnbull v Chief Executive of the Office of Environment and Heritage [2015] NSWCCA 278 Vaiusu v R [2017] NSWCCA 71 Veen v R (No 2) (1988) 164 CLR 465; [1988] HCA 14 Williams v R [2012] NSWCCA 286 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Clenton Ronald Biddle – Applicant Regina – Respondent Crown Representation: Counsel: I Bourke SC – Applicant M Cinque SC – Respondent Crown
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