Buddle v R [2018] NSWCCA 35
No error was demonstrated in the sentencing process; the aggregate sentence was not manifestly excessive and was in fact lenient given the Applicant's criminal history, the circumstances of offending, and concurrent term for balance of parole; deterioration in family or health circumstances post-sentence did not justify appellate intervention in the absence of error.
- Parties
- Applicant: Brett Craig Buddle; Respondent: Regina
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 14 March 2018
- Procedural Posture
- Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal against sentence refused
- Legal Topics
- Sentence Appeal, Break, Enter and Steal, Parole, Plea of Guilty, Manifestly Excessive Sentence, Special Circumstances
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Brett Craig Buddle
Applicant
Regina
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentencing Judge erred in the allowance for pleas of guilty and special circumstances
- 2 Whether the aggregate sentence was manifestly excessive
- 3 Whether post-sentence changes in family and health circumstances justified interference with sentence
Ratio Decidendi
No error was demonstrated in the sentencing process; the aggregate sentence was not manifestly excessive and was in fact lenient given the Applicant's criminal history, the circumstances of offending, and concurrent term for balance of parole; deterioration in family or health circumstances post-sentence did not justify appellate intervention in the absence of error.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal against sentence refused
Orders
- Leave to appeal against sentence refused
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment