NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: R v JD [2018] NSWCCA 233 Hearing dates: 10 August 2018 Date of orders: 19 October 2018 Decision date: 19 October 2018 Before: Meagher JA at [1]; Hoeben CJ at CL at [2]; Fagan J at [110] Decision: (1) The Crown appeal is allowed. (2) The aggregate sentence imposed on the respondent on 16 February 2018 by his Honour Judge Lakatos SC in respect of the offences against "R" is quashed. (3) In lieu thereof, the respondent is sentenced to an aggregate sentence with a non-parole period of 8 years, commencing 17 June 2015 and expiring 16 June 2023, with a balance of term of 4 years expiring 16 June 2027. (4) The respondent will be eligible for parole on 16 June 2023. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – Crown appeal against sentence – 19 domestic violence offences committed against wife and daughter over six year period – whether sentence manifestly inadequate – objective seriousness of offending high – offender's strong subjective case – indicative sentences suggestive of error – Crown appeal allowed – offender resentenced. Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) – ss 33B(1)(a), 59(1), 61, 61I, 61J, 61L, 86(1)(b) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) – ss 21A(2)(ea) (eb) (g), 23(2) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) – s 5D(1) Cases Cited: Cahyadi v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 1; 168 A Crim R 41 Cherry v R [2017] NSWCCA 150 CMB v Attorney General for NSW [2015] HCA 9; 256 CLR 346 Dinsdale v The Queen [2000] HCA 54; 202 CLR 321 Everett v The Queen [1994] HCA 49; 181 CLR 295 Graham v Regina [2009] NSWCCA 212 Green v The Queen; Quinn v The Queen [2011] HCA 49; 244 CLR 462 Hili v The Queen; Jones v The Queen [2010] HCA 45; 242 CLR 520 House v The King [1936] HCA 40; 55 CLR 499 JM v R [2014] NSWCCA 297; 239 A Crim R 528 Markarian v The Queen [2005] HCA 25; 228 CLR 357 Postiglione v R [1997] HCA 26; 189 CLR 295 R v Barker [2016] NSWCCA 193 R v Cramp [2004] NSWCCA 264 R v Fidow [2004] NSWCCA 172 R v Hamid [2006] NSWCCA 302; 164 A Crim R 179 R v Harris [2015] NSWCCA 81 R v Knight [2005] NSWCCA 253; 155 A Crim R 252 R v Lee [2000] NSWCCA 392 R v MAK; R v MSK [2006] NSWCCA 381; 167 A Crim R 159 R v MMK [2006] NSWCCA 272; 164 A Crim R 481 R v O'Connor [2014] NSWCCA 53; 239 A Crim R 487 R v S [2000] NSWCCA 13; 111 A Crim R 225 R v Simpson [2001] NSWCCA 534; 53 NSWLR 704 SZ v R [2007] NSWCCA 19; 168 A Crim R 249 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Regina – Appellant Crown JD – Respondent Representation: Counsel: NJ Adams – Appellant Crown GD Wendler – 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