Bao v R [2016] NSWCCA 16

Bao v R [2016] NSWCCA 16

Although the sentencing judge erred by applying an averaged guilty plea discount rather than applying the appropriate discount to each indicative sentence, and that required the Court to re-exercise the sentencing discretion, the seriousness of the applicant's drug supply offending, the Form 1 matters, the possession of precursor chemicals, and the serious aggravating feature that the 2014 offences were committed while on bail for similar offences meant that no lesser sentence than the aggregate sentence imposed was warranted in law.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the District Court of Nsw; Leave Granted and Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['supplying a Prohibited Drug' 'possessing a Precursor With Intent to Manufacture' 'guilty Plea Discounts' 'aggregate Sentences' 'indicative Sentences' 'manifest Excess' 'offending While on Bail']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['supplying a Prohibited Drug' 'possessing a Precursor With Intent to Manufacture' 'guilty Plea Discounts' 'aggregate Sentences' 'indicative Sentences' 'manifest Excess' 'offending While on Bail']

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 From the District Court of Nsw; Leave Granted and Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by sentencing the applicant on the basis that she had some prior criminal history.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by combining or averaging discounts referable to pleas of guilty for different offences.' 'Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive.' 'Whether, on re-sentence, a lesser sentence was warranted in law.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sentencing judge erred by applying an averaged guilty plea discount rather than applying the appropriate discount to each indicative sentence, and that required the Court to re-exercise the sentencing discretion, the seriousness of the applicant's drug supply offending, the Form 1 matters, the possession of precursor chemicals, and the serious aggravating feature that the 2014 offences were committed while on bail for similar offences meant that no lesser sentence than the aggregate sentence imposed was warranted in law.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is granted.' 'The appeal is dismissed.']