Shaw v R [2010] NSWCCA 23

Shaw v R [2010] NSWCCA 23

The Court found the sentencing judge intended to account for presentence custody but failed to account for an additional recognised period of 12 days; thus, the appeal should be upheld and the sentences adjusted accordingly. No separate discount for assistance to authorities was warranted as it was adequately reflected in the Queensland sentence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Sentences quashed and re-sentenced as specified.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'assistance to Authorities' 'presentence Custody' 'totality Principle']

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 / Appeal Against Sentence

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by not granting a more lenient sentence for assistance to authorities' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to take into account a period of presentence custody']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court found the sentencing judge intended to account for presentence custody but failed to account for an additional recognised period of 12 days; thus, the appeal should be upheld and the sentences adjusted accordingly. No separate discount for assistance to authorities was warranted as it was adequately reflected in the Queensland sentence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Sentences quashed and re-sentenced as specified.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted and the appeal upheld.' 'The sentences imposed in the District Court are quashed and the following sentences imposed:' 'Count 1 – imprisonment for a fixed term of 18 months commencing on 20 November 2004 and expiring on 19 May 2006.' 'Count 2 – imprisonment for a fixed term of 3 years...