R v Rankin [2019] NSWDC 706

R v Rankin [2019] NSWDC 706

Given the offender's plea of guilty, rehabilitation progress, and circumstances, a custodial sentence of one year and ten months is appropriate. It should be served by way of an intensive correction order, with strict conditions, rather than full-time imprisonment.

Parties
Offender: Jason Rankin; Prosecutor: Director of Public Prosecutions
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 April 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal / Sentence
Outcome
Sentence of imprisonment of 1 year and 10 months to be served by way of an intensive correction order.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Supply Prohibited Drug, Intensive Correction Order
Criminal Law Sentencing Supply Prohibited Drug Intensive Correction Order

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 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Jason Rankin

Offender

Director of Public Prosecutions

Prosecutor

Procedural Posture

Criminal / Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Appropriate sentence for supply of prohibited drug (methylamphetamine) by an offender who is an addict, low in the hierarchy, on parole, and pleaded guilty

Ratio Decidendi

Given the offender's plea of guilty, rehabilitation progress, and circumstances, a custodial sentence of one year and ten months is appropriate. It should be served by way of an intensive correction order, with strict conditions, rather than full-time imprisonment.

Court Disposition

Sentence of imprisonment of 1 year and 10 months to be served by way of an intensive correction order.

Orders

  • Convicted and sentenced to imprisonment of one year and ten months to be served by way of intensive correction in the community starting from the date of judgment.
  • Supervision by Probation and Parole service for as long as necessary.