NSW Caselaw
Court of Criminal Appeal Supreme Court New South Wales Medium Neutral Citation: Gagan (a pseudonym) v R [2020] NSWCCA 47 Hearing dates: 13 March 2020 Decision date: 25 March 2020 Before: Leeming JA at [1]; Harrison J at [39]; Hamill J at [40]. Decision: (1) Grant leave to appeal.
(2) Appeal allowed.
(3) Quash the sentence imposed by the District Court on 28 March 2019, and in lieu thereof:
(i) for counts 1 and 2, sentence the offender to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 9 years, with non-parole periods of 5 years, such sentences to commence on 19 October 2017 and to expire on 18 October 2026, with the non-parole periods to expire on 18 October 2022, and
(ii) for counts 4 and 5, sentence the offender to concurrent terms of imprisonment of 9 years, with non-parole periods of 5 years, such sentences to commence on 19 October 2018 and to expire on 18 October 2027, with the non-parole periods to expire on 18 October 2023.
The total effective sentence is of 10 years imprisonment, with a non-parole period of 6 years. The earliest the offender is eligible to apply for release on parole is 19 October 2023. Catchwords: CRIMINAL LAW – appeal against sentence – child sexual assault – offender suffered from serious mental illnesses – sentencing judge failed to reduce role of general deterrence despite joint submission from Crown and defence – sentencing judge found aggravating factor of substantial harm – whether victim impact statement sufficient to establish substantial harm over and above harm inherent in offence – appeal allowed and offender resentenced Legislation Cited: Crimes Act 1900 (NSW), ss 66A, 578A Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), ss 21A(2)(g), 25AA Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), s 5(1)(c) Cases Cited: Director of Public Prosecutions (Cth) v De La Rosa (2010) 79 NSWLR 1; [2010] NSWCCA 194 Manly v The Queen [2014] NSWCCA 59; 240 A Crim R 92 Marrow v R [2015] NSWCCA 282 Muggleton v R [2015] NSWCCA 62; 250 A Crim R 180 Muldrock v The Queen (2011) 244 CLR 120; [2011] HCA 39 R v Cattell [2019] NSWCCA 297 R v Tuala [2015] NSWCCA 8; 248 A Crim R 502 Ryan v R [2017] NSWCCA 209 Category: Principal judgment Parties: Gagan (a pseudonym) (Applicant) The Crown (Respondent) Representation: Counsel: J Brock (Applicant) F Veltro (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