R v Burroughs [2019] NSWDC 327

R v Burroughs [2019] NSWDC 327

The sentence hearing could not proceed because the offences and Form 1 matter were committed with a co-accused who had already been sentenced, the transcript of that sentence hearing was unavailable, and parity principles made it preferable that the same judicial officer determine sentence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 January 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Interlocutory Ruling on Sentence Hearing
Outcome
Sentence hearing adjourned to 16 May 2019.
Legal Topics
['parity in Sentencing' 'sentencing of Co Offenders' 'adjournment' 'transcript of Co Accused Sentence Hearing']

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 / Interlocutory Ruling on Sentence Hearing

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentence hearing for Karl Burroughs could properly proceed without the transcript of the co-accused Katie Marrapodi's sentence hearing." "Whether, according to parity sentencing principle, it was preferable for the same judicial officer who sentenced the co-accused to determine Mr Burroughs' sentence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence hearing could not proceed because the offences and Form 1 matter were committed with a co-accused who had already been sentenced, the transcript of that sentence hearing was unavailable, and parity principles made it preferable that the same judicial officer determine sentence.

Court Disposition

Sentence hearing adjourned to 16 May 2019.

Orders

  • ['I adjourn the sentence hearing to 16 May 2019.' 'I direct transcript be obtained of the sentence hearing of the co-accused Katie Marrapodi on 4 October 2018 before Magistrate Still in proceedings numbered 2018/00113612 and 2018/00075553.' 'I direct the parties on the next occasion, if not by application...