R v MAHE [2000] NSWCCA 425

R v MAHE [2000] NSWCCA 425

No sentencing error was demonstrated. The seven year sentence for the most serious offence was justified by the seriousness of the offence, which involved wounding and was more serious than the guideline armed robbery in R v Henry, and by the applicant's criminal history and absence of a guilty plea. Section 9 of the Sentencing Act required commencement after the prior sentence, there was no error in cumulating the sentences on the earlier 12 month sentence, the totality principle was not shown to have been overlooked, the bail-refused period had already been credited in another sentence, and the special circumstances finding did not require a further adjustment because of the prior...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 October 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal; Application for Leave to Appeal Granted; Appeal Refused
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal granted; appeal refused
Legal Topics
['robbery With Violence and Wounding' 'robbery' 'assault' 'cumulation of Sentences' 'backdating of Sentences' 'totality Principle' 'special Circumstances' 'minimum and Additional Terms']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['robbery With Violence and Wounding' 'robbery' 'assault' 'cumulation of Sentences' 'backdating of Sentences' 'totality Principle' 'special Circumstances' 'minimum and Additional Terms']

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 Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal; Application for Leave to Appeal Granted; Appeal Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences imposed by Acting Judge Ford should have been backdated rather than made cumulative on a prior 12 month sentence.' 'Whether a period during which the applicant was bail refused should have been taken into account in sentencing.' 'Whether the finding of special circumstances required a further increase of the additional term at the expense of the minimum term because the applicant was already serving a prior sentence.' 'Whether error was shown in the sentences imposed.']

Ratio Decidendi

No sentencing error was demonstrated. The seven year sentence for the most serious offence was justified by the seriousness of the offence, which involved wounding and was more serious than the guideline armed robbery in R v Henry, and by the applicant's criminal history and absence of a guilty plea. Section 9 of the Sentencing Act required commencement after the prior sentence, there was no error in cumulating the sentences on the earlier 12 month sentence, the totality principle was not shown to have been overlooked, the bail-refused period had already been credited in another sentence, and the special circumstances finding did not require a further adjustment because of the prior...

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal granted; appeal refused

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal refused.']