ATTORNEY GENERAL'S APPLICATION UNDER s37 OF THE CRIMES (SENTENCING PROCEDURE) ACT 1999 NO 2 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 515

ATTORNEY GENERAL'S APPLICATION UNDER s37 OF THE CRIMES (SENTENCING PROCEDURE) ACT 1999 NO 2 of 2002 [2002] NSWCCA 515

The Court refused to issue the proposed guideline because s60(1) covers a very wide range of conduct from trivial common assaults to very serious assaults, the proposed guideline did not adequately account for that range, there had been no history of Crown appeals showing that the normal appellate process could not correct inadequate sentences, and the recent amendments to the sentencing legislation made it premature to determine a guideline before experience had been gained under the new scheme.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 December 2002
Procedural Posture
Application for a Guideline Judgment Under S37 of the Crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 / Court of Criminal Appeal Hearing of Attorney General's Application
Outcome
Application refused.
Legal Topics
['guideline Judgment' 'assault Police' 'crimes Act 1900, S60(1)' 'general Deterrence' 'crown Appeals' 'standard Non Parole Periods']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['guideline Judgment' 'assault Police' 'crimes Act 1900, S60(1)' 'general Deterrence' 'crown Appeals' 'standard Non Parole Periods']

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

Application for a Guideline Judgment Under S37 of the Crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 / Court of Criminal Appeal Hearing of Attorney General's Application

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the Court should give a guideline judgment concerning sentences for the offence of assaulting police under s60(1) of the Crimes Act 1900.' 'Whether the offence encompassed such a wide range of offending behaviour that the proposed guideline was inappropriate.' 'Whether a demonstrated pattern of manifest inadequacy or inconsistency in sentencing had been shown in the absence of Crown appeals.' 'Whether recent amendments to the sentencing regime made the application premature.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Court refused to issue the proposed guideline because s60(1) covers a very wide range of conduct from trivial common assaults to very serious assaults, the proposed guideline did not adequately account for that range, there had been no history of Crown appeals showing that the normal appellate process could not correct inadequate sentences, and the recent amendments to the sentencing legislation made it premature to determine a guideline before experience had been gained under the new scheme.

Court Disposition

Application refused.

Orders

  • ['Application refused.']