Tran v R [2010] NSWCCA 183

Tran v R [2010] NSWCCA 183

Because the applicant pleaded guilty before being committed for sentence, the Criminal Case Conferencing Trial Act 2008 required a 25 percent discount. The sentencing judge allowed only 20 percent, which was a material error conceded by the Crown. The sentences were therefore quashed and the applicant was resentenced, with count 2 assessed as significantly above the middle range of objective seriousness and count 1 as significantly below the middle range.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 August 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence and Resentencing
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed, sentences quashed and applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['firearms Offences' 'prohibited Weapon' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'manifest Excessiveness' 'resentencing']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['firearms Offences' 'prohibited Weapon' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'manifest Excessiveness' 'resentencing']

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 Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence and Resentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by allowing a 20 percent discount rather than the statutory 25 percent discount for guilty pleas entered before committal for sentence.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the objective seriousness of the firearms offence.' 'Whether the sentences were manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

Because the applicant pleaded guilty before being committed for sentence, the Criminal Case Conferencing Trial Act 2008 required a 25 percent discount. The sentencing judge allowed only 20 percent, which was a material error conceded by the Crown. The sentences were therefore quashed and the applicant was resentenced, with count 2 assessed as significantly above the middle range of objective seriousness and count 1 as significantly below the middle range.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed, sentences quashed and applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Allow the appeal.' 'Quash the sentences and in lieu thereof sentence the applicant as follows: count 1 - imprisonment for a non parole period of six months to commence on 10 June 2008 and expire on 9 December 2008 with a balance of term of two months to expire on 9 February 2009; count 2 -...