R v AM [2001] NSWCCA 80

R v AM [2001] NSWCCA 80

The applicant's deliberate role was to subdue Mrs Stewart so that the co-offenders could carry out the intended murder of Mr Stewart. Although he did not play the same direct role in the attack on Mr Stewart, the sentencing judge gave adequate recognition to that difference, to the pleas of guilty, and to assistance to authorities. No error in the sentencing approach was established, so leave was granted but the appeal was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 February 2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['parity in Sentencing' 'severity Appeal' 'guilty Plea' 'assistance to Authorities' 'principal in the Second Degree' 'grievous Bodily Harm With Intent to Murder' 'using an Offensive Weapon to Commit an Indictable Offence of Assault']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['parity in Sentencing' 'severity Appeal' 'guilty Plea' 'assistance to Authorities' 'principal in the Second Degree' 'grievous Bodily Harm With Intent to Murder' 'using an Offensive Weapon to Commit an Indictable Offence of Assault']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences imposed on the applicant were manifestly excessive or otherwise erroneous on parity grounds compared with co-offenders.' "Whether the starting point of eighteen years for the offence against Mr Stewart adequately reflected the applicant's lesser role and conviction as a principal in the second degree." "Whether the applicant's plea of guilty and assistance to authorities warranted a greater discount than was allowed." "Whether the applicant's removal of the child from the room during the attack warranted any greater reduction in sentence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant's deliberate role was to subdue Mrs Stewart so that the co-offenders could carry out the intended murder of Mr Stewart. Although he did not play the same direct role in the attack on Mr Stewart, the sentencing judge gave adequate recognition to that difference, to the pleas of guilty, and to assistance to authorities. No error in the sentencing approach was established, so leave was granted but the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']