R v Handley [2001] NSWCCA 311

R v Handley [2001] NSWCCA 311

The sentence was not excessive. The applicant's admissions and records established that he was dealing in drugs, partly to support his habit and partly for profit, so there was no basis for the contention that the drugs were only for personal use. The hardship to his de facto partner and children did not amount to exceptional hardship. The sentencing judge had taken into account rehabilitation, family circumstances, drug counselling needs and the applicant's bravery award, and appropriately treated these as special circumstances justifying the non-parole period.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 August 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'manifest Excess' 'supply Prohibited Drug on an Ongoing Basis' 'family Hardship in Sentencing' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'manifest Excess' 'supply Prohibited Drug on an Ongoing Basis' 'family Hardship in Sentencing' 'special Circumstances' '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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence of imprisonment for three years and one month with a non-parole period of eighteen months was manifestly excessive.' "Whether the applicant's submission that the drugs were for personal use only had any basis." "Whether hardship to the applicant's spouse and children should mitigate sentence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence was not excessive. The applicant's admissions and records established that he was dealing in drugs, partly to support his habit and partly for profit, so there was no basis for the contention that the drugs were only for personal use. The hardship to his de facto partner and children did not amount to exceptional hardship. The sentencing judge had taken into account rehabilitation, family circumstances, drug counselling needs and the applicant's bravery award, and appropriately treated these as special circumstances justifying the non-parole period.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']