R v Russon [2001] NSWCCA 166

R v Russon [2001] NSWCCA 166

Leave to appeal was warranted because the evidence before the sentencing judge made it irresistible that the applicant's psychiatric or psychological conditions played some role in the offences, and there was evidence that anxiety, agoraphobia and panic attacks would make custody more onerous. Although the overall term imposed was not shown to be incorrect given the serious objective circumstances, the subjective circumstances justified reducing the non-parole period.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 May 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court; Appeal Determined by the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; sentences set aside; applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['armed Robbery' 'assault Police' 'psychiatric or Psychological Conditions in Sentencing' 'non Parole Period' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['armed Robbery' 'assault Police' 'psychiatric or Psychological Conditions in Sentencing' 'non Parole Period' 'special Circumstances']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court; Appeal Determined by the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred in holding that the appellant's psychiatric or psychological conditions played no role in the commission of the offences." "Whether the appellant's anxiety, agoraphobia and tendency to panic attacks would make full-time custody more onerous than in the average case." 'Whether the sentences should be set aside and a different non-parole period imposed.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was warranted because the evidence before the sentencing judge made it irresistible that the applicant's psychiatric or psychological conditions played some role in the offences, and there was evidence that anxiety, agoraphobia and panic attacks would make custody more onerous. Although the overall term imposed was not shown to be incorrect given the serious objective circumstances, the subjective circumstances justified reducing the non-parole period.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; sentences set aside; applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['In relation to the count under s 97(1) of the Crimes Act, the applicant was sentenced to an overall term of six years commencing on 12 August 1999 and expiring on 11 August 2005.' 'A non-parole period of three years was imposed commencing on 12 August 1999 and expiring on 11 August 2002.' 'In relation to the...