NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Kristensen v R [2018] NSWCCA 189 Hearing dates: 13 July 2018 Date of orders: 03 September 2018 Decision date: 03 September 2018 Before: Payne JA at [1]; R A Hulme J at [41]; Button J at [46]. Decision: (1) Leave to appeal granted; (2) Set aside the sentence imposed by English DCJ and in lieu thereof sentence the applicant as follows: (a) fix a period of imprisonment of 1 year 6 months to commence on 27 October 2017 and expire on 26 April 2019; (b) pursuant to s 19AC of the Crimes Act (1914) (Cth), order that the applicant be released on a recognisance, without sureties, to be of good behaviour for 6 months, after having served 12 months of that sentence. (c) the applicant's release date is 26 October 2018. Catchwords: SENTENCING — Appeal against sentence – use carriage service to send indecent material to a person less than sixteen years – 474.27A(1) Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) – whether the sentencing judge did not have regard to the utilitarian value of the guilty plea - Xiao v R [2018] NSWCCA 4; (2018) 329 FLR 1 Legislation Cited: Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW) ss 3, 3A, 14A, 19 Crimes Act 1914 (Cth) ss 16A, 17A, 19AC, 19AK Criminal Code Act 1995 (Cth) s 474.27A Crimes Legislation Amendment (Sexual Offences Against Children) Bill 2010 Migration Act 1958 (Cth) ss 501, 501CA Migration Amendment (Character and General Visa Cancellation) Act 2014 (Cth) Cases Cited: AC v R [2016] NSWCCA 107 Guden v R (2010) 28 VR 288; [2010] VSCA 196 Kentwell v The Queen (2014) 252 CLR 601; [2014] HCA 37 Putland v The Queen (2004) 218 CLR 174; [2004] HCA 8 Power v The Queen (1974) 131 CLR 623; [1974] HCA 26 R v Aniezue [2016] ACTSC 82 R v Arrowsmith [2018] SASCFC 47 R v Ellis (1986) 6 NSWLR 603 R v Girard [2004] NSWCCA 170 R v Glynatsis [2013] NSWCCA 131; (2013) 230 A Crim R 99 R v Jones [2004] VSCA 68 R v Linardon [2014] NSWCCA 247 R v Mirzaee [2004] NSWCCA 315 R v Schelvis; R v Hildebrand [2016] QCA 294; (2016) 263 A Crim R 1 R v Shrestha (1991) 173 CLR 48; [1991] HCA 26 R v Van Hong Pham [2005] NSWCCA 94 R v Zhang [2017] SASCFC 5 Rios v R [2012] NSWCCA 8 Ruano v R [2011] NSWCCA 149 Sabel v R; R v Sabel [2014] NSWCCA 101; (2014) 242 A Crim R 49 Tector v The Queen [2008] NSWCCA 151; (2008) 186 A Crim R 133 Xiao v R [2018] NSWCCA 4; (2018) 329 FLR 1 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Rainer Kristensen (Applicant) DPP (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: J Paingakulam; P Allport (Applicant) L Crowley (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