R v WILLIAMS [2004] NSWCCA 64

R v WILLIAMS [2004] NSWCCA 64

The appeal failed because the application for the s.11 adjournment was made and granted on the premise that a custodial sentence was possible and likely, the adjournment was directed to rehabilitation and assessment of the non-parole period, and the sentencing judge's comments about a further term of imprisonment concerned the consequences of breaching bail conditions rather than suggesting that custody would be avoided at the end of the adjournment.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2004
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From the District Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['griffiths Remand' 'deferral of Sentencing for Rehabilitation' 'custodial Sentence' 'non Parole Period' 'crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'break, Enter and Steal']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['griffiths Remand' 'deferral of Sentencing for Rehabilitation' 'custodial Sentence' 'non Parole Period' 'crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'break, Enter and Steal']

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

Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appeal to the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal From the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an adjournment under s.11 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act (NSW) 1999 was appropriate where a custodial sentence was likely.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to inform the respondent that he was likely to receive a custodial sentence notwithstanding the 12 month adjournment for rehabilitation.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the application for the s.11 adjournment was made and granted on the premise that a custodial sentence was possible and likely, the adjournment was directed to rehabilitation and assessment of the non-parole period, and the sentencing judge's comments about a further term of imprisonment concerned the consequences of breaching bail conditions rather than suggesting that custody would be avoided at the end of the adjournment.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed.']