NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Battersby v R [2018] NSWCCA 141 Hearing dates: 4 May 2018 Decision date: 16 July 2018 Before: Hoeben CJ at CL [1] Walton J at [2] Button J at [105] Decision: 1. Leave to appeal against sentence granted.
2. Appeal allowed.
3. Pursuant to s 53A(1) of the Sentencing Act, an aggregate term of imprisonment of 12 years is imposed which commences on 16 November 2015 and concludes on 15 November 2027 with a non-parole period of 8 years concluding on 15 November 2023.
4. Pursuant to s 53A(2)(b) of the Sentencing Act, the indicative sentences in that respect are as follows:
(1) sequence 1: 10 years with a non-parole period of 6 years and 6 months;
(2) sequence 2: 3 years; and
(3) sequence 3: 5 years with a non-parole period of 3 years. Catchwords: SENTENCING APPEAL – leave to appeal –convictions for large commercial supply of ecstasy and cocaine and proceeds of crime – error in maximum penalty taken into account for proceeds of crime offence –error in maximum penalty vitiated the exercise of sentencing discretion –resentencing required – whether error to find applicant was "well above lowest rung" of drug trafficking hierarchy – evaluation of objective seriousness and offenders role – onus where full nature of criminal enterprise not known – role of offender inferred from quantity of drugs – no error in discretionary sentencing judgment regarding evaluation of offender's role – parity ground not presently available – reliance on comparable sentences and JIRS statistics – resentencing Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) Drug Misuse and Trafficking Act 1985 (NSW) Cases Cited: AB v R [2014] NSWCCA 31 Andreata v R [2015] NSWCCA 239 Ayik v R [2013] NSWCCA 119 Campbell v R [2018] NSWCCA 17 Chong v R [2017] NSWCCA 185 Coetzee v R [2007] NSWCCA 12 Elchiekh v R [2016] NSWCCA 225 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Koh v R [2013] NSWCCA 287 Lee v R [2016] NSWCCA 146 Lehn v R (2016) 78 MVR 353; [2016] NSWCCA 255 Mooney v R [2016] NSWCCA 303 Newtown v R [2009] NSWCCA 128 Nguyen v R [2014] NSWCCA 16 Nguyen v R [2017] NSWCCA 39 Potts v R [2017] NSWCCA 10 R v Lao [2003] NSWCCA 315 R v Niketic [2002] NSWCCA 425 Radi v R [2013] NSWCCA 278 Salafia v R [2015] NSWCCA 141 See v R [2017] NSWCCA 165 Sutton v R [2016] NSWCCA 249 Why v R [2017] NSWCCA 101 Zaky v R (Cth) [2017] NSWCCA 141 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Jonathan Battersby (Applicant) The Crown Representation: Counsel: S Odgers SC (Applicant) B Hatfield (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