Bisiker v R [2022] NSWCCA 110

Bisiker v R [2022] NSWCCA 110

Leave to appeal out of time was granted, but the appeal was dismissed because no appellable error was shown. The federal offences and the two State offences involved distinct legal and factual criminality, including separate criminality in breaching reporting obligations under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW) and in possessing a large quantity of child abuse material. A not insignificant accumulation was appropriate, and the total effective head sentence of 6 years and 11 months and effective non-parole period of 4 years and 11 months were not manifestly excessive having regard to objective gravity, deterrence, and the applicant's personal circumstances.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 June 2022
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time From District Court Sentence; Appeal Determined by Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal out of time granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['manifest Excess' 'totality Principle' 'concurrency and Accumulation' 'child Pornography and Child Abuse Material Offences' 'child Protection Offender Reporting Obligations' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'appeals'] ['manifest Excess' 'totality Principle' 'concurrency and Accumulation' 'child Pornography and Child Abuse Material Offences' 'child Protection Offender Reporting Obligations' 'non Parole Period']

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 Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Out of Time From District Court Sentence; Appeal Determined by Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal out of time should be granted.' 'Whether the total effective head sentence and non-parole period were manifestly excessive.' 'Whether the primary judge erred in applying the totality principle to concurrency and accumulation across federal and State offences.' 'Whether there was appellable error in the exercise of the sentencing discretion.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal out of time was granted, but the appeal was dismissed because no appellable error was shown. The federal offences and the two State offences involved distinct legal and factual criminality, including separate criminality in breaching reporting obligations under the Child Protection (Offenders Registration) Act 2000 (NSW) and in possessing a large quantity of child abuse material. A not insignificant accumulation was appropriate, and the total effective head sentence of 6 years and 11 months and effective non-parole period of 4 years and 11 months were not manifestly excessive having regard to objective gravity, deterrence, and the applicant's personal circumstances.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal out of time granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal out of time.' 'Appeal dismissed.']