AP v R [2017] NSWCCA 270
The sentencing judge was not required by law to make a more elaborate finding as to the objective seriousness of Counts 5 and 6, which did not carry standard non-parole periods; the judge's remarks that the counts were "objectively serious matters", considered in light of the sentencing reasons as a whole, satisfied the relevant legal requirements. No error was demonstrated in the approach taken or the reasons given.
- Parties
- Applicant: AP; Respondent: Regina
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 24 November 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Objective Seriousness of Offences, Assessment of Criminality, Appeals Against Sentence
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
AP
Applicant
Regina
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentencing judge failed to make and state an assessment of the seriousness of Counts 5 and 6.
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge was not required by law to make a more elaborate finding as to the objective seriousness of Counts 5 and 6, which did not carry standard non-parole periods; the judge's remarks that the counts were "objectively serious matters", considered in light of the sentencing reasons as a whole, satisfied the relevant legal requirements. No error was demonstrated in the approach taken or the reasons given.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Leave to appeal is granted.
- The appeal is dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment