NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Isbitzki v R [2019] NSWCCA 247 Hearing dates: 27 September 2019 Date of orders: 18 October 2019 Decision date: 18 October 2019 Before: Payne JA at [1] Fullerton J at [2] Adamson J at [80] Decision: 1. Leave to appeal is granted. 2. The appeal is upheld. 3. The sentence imposed in the District Court on 10 March 2017 is quashed. 4. In lieu thereof, a sentence of imprisonment of 3 years and 9 months is imposed commencing on 8 May 2016 and expiring on 7 February 2020 with a non-parole period of 2 years and 3 months expiring on 8 August 2018. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – appeals – appeal against sentence – applicant pleaded guilty to one count of aggravated break and enter with intent to commit a serious indictable offence – further offence of intimidation taken into account on sentence – head sentence of 6 years' imprisonment – whether the sentencing judge erred in their treatment of the offending as aggravated – sufficient basis to make out aggravation – whether the sentencing judge failed to give proper regard to the applicant's traumatic brain injury – where the applicant had previously sustained a diffuse axonal injury – whether the sentencing judge should have found special circumstances – where the applicant has significant rehabilitative needs in light of his brain injury – Court obliged to resentence – applicant resentenced to head sentence of 3 years and 9 months' imprisonment Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) Crimes (Forensic Procedures) Act 2000 (NSW) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) Cases Cited: Aslan v R [2014] NSWCCA 114 Hejazi v R [2009] NSWCCA 282 Kaderavek v R [2018] NSWCCA 92 Markarian v the Queen (2005) 228 CLR 357; [2005] HCA 25 Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa [2010] NSWCCA 194 R v Hughes [2018] NSWCCA 2 R v Johnson [2004] NSWCCA 76 R v Newman; R v Simpson [2004] NSWCCA 102 Tepania v R [2018] NSWCCA 247 Yun v R [2017] NSWCCA 317 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Jason Mark Isbitzki (Applicant) The Crown (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: I McLachlan (Applicant) D Patch (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