R v ROBERTS [2005] NSWCCA 401

R v ROBERTS [2005] NSWCCA 401

The sentencing judge made no error of the kind described in House v The King, and the sentence of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2½ years was not manifestly excessive. The sentence was within the available range, appropriate given the appellant's prior offending and absence of contrition, and consistent with parity because Mr Patterson's lower sentence reflected a guilty plea discount.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['aggravated Break, Enter and Steal' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'parity' 'sentencing Discretion']

Case Brief

Summary, issues, holding and outcome

More case intelligence is available

Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.

Full judgment text Downloadable case file Legal principles 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentencing Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal against sentence should be granted.' 'Whether the sentence imposed for aggravated break, enter and steal contrary to s.112(2) of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW) was manifestly excessive.' 'Whether the sentence was consistent with parity principles by reference to the sentence imposed on Mr Patterson.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge made no error of the kind described in House v The King, and the sentence of 4 years with a non-parole period of 2½ years was not manifestly excessive. The sentence was within the available range, appropriate given the appellant's prior offending and absence of contrition, and consistent with parity because Mr Patterson's lower sentence reflected a guilty plea discount.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal be granted and the appeal be dismissed.']