Regina v Toritto [1999] NSWCCA 288

Regina v Toritto [1999] NSWCCA 288

The Court held that the aggregate sentence of 4 years dating from 28 August 1998, with a minimum term of 3 years and an additional term of 1 year, was not appellably excessive. The applicant was not entitled to the full benefit of the seven months in custody both for the revoked parole sentence and for the new sentences, the sentencing judge had adverted to special circumstances, and a severe sentence was open given the seriousness of the offences, the applicant's criminal history, and the fact that all offences were committed on parole and some also on bail. There was no appellable disparity with co-offender Giacalone, whose aggregate sentence was 7 years and whose offences were not...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 September 1999
Procedural Posture
Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['robbery' 'assault With Intent to Rob' 'scheduled Offences' 'parole Revocation' 'conditional Bail' 'pre Sentence Custody' 'special Circumstances' 'parity in Sentencing' 'appellate Review of Sentence']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Procedure'] ['robbery' 'assault With Intent to Rob' 'scheduled Offences' 'parole Revocation' 'conditional Bail' 'pre Sentence Custody' 'special Circumstances' 'parity in Sentencing' 'appellate Review of Sentence']

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

Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences imposed on the applicant were appellably excessive having regard to pre-sentence custody, parole revocation and special circumstances.' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to give proper effect to special circumstances under the Sentencing Act.' "Whether there was appellable disparity between the applicant's sentence and the sentence imposed on his co-offender Giacalone."]

Ratio Decidendi

The Court held that the aggregate sentence of 4 years dating from 28 August 1998, with a minimum term of 3 years and an additional term of 1 year, was not appellably excessive. The applicant was not entitled to the full benefit of the seven months in custody both for the revoked parole sentence and for the new sentences, the sentencing judge had adverted to special circumstances, and a severe sentence was open given the seriousness of the offences, the applicant's criminal history, and the fact that all offences were committed on parole and some also on bail. There was no appellable disparity with co-offender Giacalone, whose aggregate sentence was 7 years and whose offences were not...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is granted.' 'The appeal is dismissed.']