R v Baker [2019] NSWCCA 58

R v Baker [2019] NSWCCA 58

The sentence imposed was manifestly inadequate because the assessment of the objective seriousness of the solicit to murder offences was understated, given the respondent's instigation, use of a professional killer, targeting of child victims including his son, and motivation to interfere with justice. The Court concluded that the starting point head sentences were clearly inadequate and warranted resentencing, applying a greater discount for assistance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Determination
Outcome
Crown appeal allowed; respondent resentenced
Legal Topics
['crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'sexual Offences Against Children' 'solicitation to Murder' 'firearm Offences' 'objective Seriousness' 'manifest Inadequacy' 'principle of Totality' 'parity in Sentencing' 'special Circumstances' 'discount for Assistance to Authorities']
['criminal Law'] ['crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'sexual Offences Against Children' 'solicitation to Murder' 'firearm Offences' 'objective Seriousness' 'manifest Inadequacy' 'principle of Totality' 'parity in Sentencing' 'special Circumstances' 'discount for Assistance to Authorities']

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

Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Determination

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the objective seriousness of the solicit to murder offences' 'Whether the sentence was manifestly inadequate' 'Whether residual discretion should be exercised to prevent intervention in resentencing']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence imposed was manifestly inadequate because the assessment of the objective seriousness of the solicit to murder offences was understated, given the respondent's instigation, use of a professional killer, targeting of child victims including his son, and motivation to interfere with justice. The Court concluded that the starting point head sentences were clearly inadequate and warranted resentencing, applying a greater discount for assistance.

Court Disposition

Crown appeal allowed; respondent resentenced

Orders

  • ['The Crown appeal is allowed.' 'The sentence imposed in the District Court on 20 July 2018 is quashed.' 'In lieu thereof the respondent is sentenced to imprisonment for 15 years and 3 months commencing 15 January 2015 and expiring 14 April 2030 with a non-parole period of 11 years and 5 months expiring 14 June 2026.']