NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Canzius v R [2017] NSWCCA 177 Hearing dates: 14 July 2017 Decision date: 26 July 2017 Before: Gleeson JA at [1] Harrison J at [79] Fullerton J at [80] Decision: (1) Refuse leave to appeal against sentence with respect to proposed grounds 5 and 6.
(2) Grant leave to appeal against sentence with respect to grounds 1, 2, 3, 4 and 7.
(3) Appeal dismissed. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – application for leave to appeal against sentence – where late plea of guilty to offence of reckless wounding contrary to s 35(4), Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – where sentence of 2 years, 8 months with non-parole period of 1 year, 4 months – whether judge erred by circumscribing his discretion in relation to length of sentence – whether judge gave primary or determinative significance to standard non parole period of three years – whether judge erred in placing emphasis on specific and general deterrence – whether judge failed to take into account applicant's mental health issues – whether the possibility of summary disposal should have been taken into account by the judge in mitigation of penalty – whether sentence manifestly excessive. Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), s 35(4) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 9, 12, 54A, 54B Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW), s 258(a), 267(2), Sch 1 Cases Cited: Aslan v R [2014] NSWCCA 114 Couloumbis v R [2012] NSWCCA 264 Dinsdale v The Queen (2000) 202 CLR 321; [2000] HCA 54 Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v Di La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Douar v R [2005] NSWCCA 445 Hili v R; Jones v R (2010) 242 CLR 520; [2010] HCA 45 House v The King (1936) 55 CLR 499; [1936] HCA 40 Lowndes v The Queen (1999) 195 CLR 665; [1999] HCA 29 Markarian v The Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357 Muldrock v R (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39 Papworth v R [2011] NSWCCA 253 R v Doan [2000] NSWCCA 317 R v JCE (2000) 120 A Crim R 18; [2000] NSWCCA 498 R v Morgan (1993) 70 A Crim R 368 R v Zamagias [2002] NSWCCA 17 Wong v R; Leung v R (2001) 207 CLR 584; [2001] HCA 64 Zreika v R [2012] NSWCCA 44 Category: Sentence Parties: Raymond Anthony Canzius (Applicant) Regina (Crown) Representation: Counsel: M Ramage QC (Applicant) S Hughes (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