Regina v Keith Brown [2001] NSWCCA 367

Regina v Keith Brown [2001] NSWCCA 367

There was no identifiable error of law in the sentencing remarks, but the sentences were heavy to the point of falling outside the upper end of the permissible range, particularly in light of the uncontradicted evidence that the applicant had taken significant and substantially successful steps towards rehabilitation from drug addiction during his pre-sentence custody. A restrained adjustment was warranted, including backdating to reflect the seven weeks in custody.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 September 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentences Imposed in the District Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; sentences imposed in the District Court quashed; applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['supply of Prohibited Drug' 'methylamphetamine' 'manifest Excess' 'pre Sentence Custody' 'non Parole Period' 'rehabilitation' 'form 1 Matters']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['supply of Prohibited Drug' 'methylamphetamine' 'manifest Excess' 'pre Sentence Custody' 'non Parole Period' 'rehabilitation' 'form 1 Matters']

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 Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentences Imposed in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences for two counts of supply of methylamphetamine were manifestly excessive.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by not backdating the sentences to reflect approximately seven weeks spent in pre-sentence custody.' "Whether the applicant's rehabilitation from drug addiction and other subjective matters warranted appellate intervention."]

Ratio Decidendi

There was no identifiable error of law in the sentencing remarks, but the sentences were heavy to the point of falling outside the upper end of the permissible range, particularly in light of the uncontradicted evidence that the applicant had taken significant and substantially successful steps towards rehabilitation from drug addiction during his pre-sentence custody. A restrained adjustment was warranted, including backdating to reflect the seven weeks in custody.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; sentences imposed in the District Court quashed; applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Uphold the appeal.' 'Quash each of the sentences imposed in the Court below.' 'On count 1, impose a sentence of imprisonment for four years commencing on a day seven weeks prior to 1 September 2000, with a non-parole period of two years to commence on that same day.' 'On count 2, impose a...