R v Le [2005] NSWCCA 162

R v Le [2005] NSWCCA 162

There was no error disclosed in the sentencing process or exercise of discretion warranting appellate intervention; while a fifteen percent discount was at the lower end of the applicable range, it was not manifestly inadequate and the sentence was not manifestly excessive given the gravity of the offending.

Parties
Crown: Regina; Applicant: Anh Tuan Le
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted. Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Severity of Sentence, Plea of Guilty, Supply of Prohibited Drugs, Discount for Plea, Sentencing, Manifestly Excessive Sentence
Criminal Law Severity of Sentence Plea of Guilty Supply of Prohibited Drugs Discount for Plea Sentencing Manifestly Excessive Sentence

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 3 Authorities cited 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 17
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Crown

Anh Tuan Le

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in the discount given for plea of guilty
  2. 2 Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

There was no error disclosed in the sentencing process or exercise of discretion warranting appellate intervention; while a fifteen percent discount was at the lower end of the applicable range, it was not manifestly inadequate and the sentence was not manifestly excessive given the gravity of the offending.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted. Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Appeal dismissed