Ellis v R [2015] NSWCCA 262

Ellis v R [2015] NSWCCA 262

The sentencing judge's intervention was unwarranted and deprived the applicant of the opportunity to properly present his case, causing a miscarriage of justice. The question requiring identification of persons in a photograph was of doubtful relevance, was asked early in examination-in-chief before evidentiary issues had crystallised, and was asked despite notice that the applicant was reluctant to identify co-offenders. The judge reacted to the applicant's refusal by suggesting he was not prepared to tell the truth and by threatening contempt without first considering the reasons for refusal or hearing argument. The judge misapprehended his role by insisting that the applicant tell the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 September 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Extension of time granted, leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed, sentence quashed, and matter remitted to the District Court for resentencing by a differently constituted Court.
Legal Topics
['procedural Fairness' 'judicial Intervention' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'manufacturing a Large Commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'resentencing']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['procedural Fairness' 'judicial Intervention' 'miscarriage of Justice' 'manufacturing a Large Commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'resentencing']

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 Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the applicant was denied procedural fairness and the sentencing proceedings miscarried by reason of the sentencing judge's intervention during the applicant's evidence and insistence that he identify persons depicted in exhibit E." 'Whether the applicant had a justifiable sense of grievance when his sentence was compared with the sentences passed upon his co-offenders.' 'Whether an extension of time to apply for leave to appeal should be granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge's intervention was unwarranted and deprived the applicant of the opportunity to properly present his case, causing a miscarriage of justice. The question requiring identification of persons in a photograph was of doubtful relevance, was asked early in examination-in-chief before evidentiary issues had crystallised, and was asked despite notice that the applicant was reluctant to identify co-offenders. The judge reacted to the applicant's refusal by suggesting he was not prepared to tell the truth and by threatening contempt without first considering the reasons for refusal or hearing argument. The judge misapprehended his role by insisting that the applicant tell the...

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted, leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed, sentence quashed, and matter remitted to the District Court for resentencing by a differently constituted Court.

Orders

  • ['Extend the time for lodging an application for leave to appeal up to and including 15 May 2015.' 'Grant the applicant leave to appeal.' 'Allow the appeal and quash the sentence imposed on the applicant by the District Court on 3 July 2012.' 'Remit the matter to the District Court for resentencing of the applicant...