Ayshow v R [2011] NSWCCA 240
The sentencing judge’s assessment of objective seriousness for the drug supply and firearm offences, determination of accumulation and concurrency, and overall sentence, were within the proper exercise of discretion; evidence did not support reduction of moral culpability based on mental illness; total effective sentence was not manifestly excessive.
- Parties
- Applicant: Adeson Johnson Ayshow; Respondent: Regina
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 11 November 2011
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Granted; Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Drug Offences, Firearms Offences, Proceeds of Crime, Accumulation and Totality, Objective Seriousness
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Adeson Johnson Ayshow
Applicant
Regina
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Granted; Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether error in assessment of objective seriousness of ecstasy commercial supply offence
- 2 Whether error in approach to accumulation and totality
- 3 Whether total effective sentence manifestly excessive
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge’s assessment of objective seriousness for the drug supply and firearm offences, determination of accumulation and concurrency, and overall sentence, were within the proper exercise of discretion; evidence did not support reduction of moral culpability based on mental illness; total effective sentence was not manifestly excessive.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.
Orders
- Leave to appeal granted
- Appeal against sentence 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