Watts v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 153

Watts v Regina [2007] NSWCCA 153

The sentence imposed for Count 2 was appealably excessive because the very large increase applied for the 22 Form 1 offences, combined with the severity of an 8-year term commencing after accumulated sentences, exceeded the range open to the sentencing judge when proper weight was given to the applicant's age, low-average intellectual functioning, troubled background, drug addiction, contrition, delay, risk of institutionalisation and prospects of rehabilitation. A less severe sentence was warranted in law.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
14 June 2007
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence and Application to Extend Time / New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Sentences
Outcome
Time to apply for leave to appeal extended; sentence on Count 2 quashed and applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['break, Enter and Steal' 'break and Enter With Intent to Steal' 'malicious Damage' 'manifest Excess' 'form 1 Offences' 'youth and Subjective Circumstances' 'drug Addiction' 'extension of Time']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['break, Enter and Steal' 'break and Enter With Intent to Steal' 'malicious Damage' 'manifest Excess' 'form 1 Offences' 'youth and Subjective Circumstances' 'drug Addiction' 'extension of Time']

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 Leave to Appeal Against Sentence and Application to Extend Time / New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From District Court Sentences

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether time to apply for leave to appeal against sentence should be extended.' 'Whether the sentence of 8 years with a non-parole period of 4 years for Count 2, taking into account 22 Form 1 offences, was manifestly excessive.' "Whether the total effective sentence of 11 years with a non-parole period of 7 years was manifestly excessive having regard to the applicant's age, background, drug addiction, criminal history, pleas, contrition and delay."]

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence imposed for Count 2 was appealably excessive because the very large increase applied for the 22 Form 1 offences, combined with the severity of an 8-year term commencing after accumulated sentences, exceeded the range open to the sentencing judge when proper weight was given to the applicant's age, low-average intellectual functioning, troubled background, drug addiction, contrition, delay, risk of institutionalisation and prospects of rehabilitation. A less severe sentence was warranted in law.

Court Disposition

Time to apply for leave to appeal extended; sentence on Count 2 quashed and applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Extend the time to apply for leave to appeal to 16 February 2007.' 'Quash the sentence imposed for the offence in Count 2 on the indictment and in lieu thereof sentence the applicant to imprisonment for a non-parole period of 3 years and a total term of 5 years to commence on 8 January 2007; the applicant is...