REGINA v BOOTH [2000] NSWCCA 239

REGINA v BOOTH [2000] NSWCCA 239

Although the sentencing judge's description of the frequency of offending was mistaken, the fifteen counts were representative of a sustained course of sexual exploitation and the applicant's culpability warranted the sentences imposed. The sentencing judge had recognised the plea of guilty, contrition, rehabilitation and the hardship of protection, and the sentence was not more severe than warranted in law.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 May 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal From Sentence Imposed in the District Court; Leave Granted and Appeal Determined
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; substantive appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['child Sexual Offences' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'general Deterrence' 'protective Custody' 'special Circumstances' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['child Sexual Offences' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'general Deterrence' 'protective Custody' 'special Circumstances' 'manifest Excess']

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 From Sentence Imposed in the District Court; Leave Granted and Appeal Determined

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge materially erred by describing the sexual behaviour as having been committed about twice a month over the period 1985 to 1992.' "Whether the sentencing judge gave inadequate attention to the significance of the applicant's plea of guilty." 'Whether the sentence was more severe than warranted in law under s 6(3) Criminal Appeal Act 1912.' "Whether the applicant's need to serve the sentence in protection required further allowance in sentencing."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sentencing judge's description of the frequency of offending was mistaken, the fifteen counts were representative of a sustained course of sexual exploitation and the applicant's culpability warranted the sentences imposed. The sentencing judge had recognised the plea of guilty, contrition, rehabilitation and the hardship of protection, and the sentence was not more severe than warranted in law.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; substantive appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted' 'Substantive appeal dismissed']