Saliba v R [2023] NSWCCA 298
The sentencing judge misallocated seriousness by attributing a second gunshot injury to Count 3 instead of Count 2, but the factual error did not involve any material misconception about the overall criminality or harm. Accordingly, no lesser aggregate sentence was warranted; the error simply required reallocation between counts.
- Parties
- Applicant: Adam Saliba; Respondent: Rex
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 29 November 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Sentence and Determination of Appeal
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Against Sentence, Possession of Firearm, Recklessly Cause Grievous Bodily Harm, Discharge Firearm, Sentencing Error, Aggregate Sentence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Adam Saliba
Applicant
Rex
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Sentence and Determination of Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Did the sentencing judge misapprehend the facts regarding which counts involved gunshot wounds?
- 2 Was a lesser aggregate sentence warranted as a result of factual error?
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge misallocated seriousness by attributing a second gunshot injury to Count 3 instead of Count 2, but the factual error did not involve any material misconception about the overall criminality or harm. Accordingly, no lesser aggregate sentence was warranted; the error simply required reallocation between counts.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Grant leave to appeal.
- Appeal dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment