Alcorn v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 209

Alcorn v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 209

The sentencing judge misdirected himself both in categorising the applicant's objective criminality and in failing to sentence appropriately for multiple offences as required by Pearce v The Queen. Sentences were quashed and resentences imposed reflecting proper assessment of criminality and sentencing principles.

Parties
Appellant: Brian Dean Alcorn; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentences quashed; new sentences imposed as specified.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Use of False Instrument, Corrupt Commissions, Appeal Against Sentence
Criminal Law Sentencing Use of False Instrument Corrupt Commissions Appeal Against Sentence

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 3 Authorities cited 7 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 12
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Brian Dean Alcorn

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in categorising the appellant's criminality
  2. 2 Whether delay between the appellant's disclosure of offences and being charged was properly considered
  3. 3 Whether sufficient regard was had to restitution and reparation

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge misdirected himself both in categorising the applicant's objective criminality and in failing to sentence appropriately for multiple offences as required by Pearce v The Queen. Sentences were quashed and resentences imposed reflecting proper assessment of criminality and sentencing principles.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentences quashed; new sentences imposed as specified.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal against sentence granted
  • Appeal against sentence allowed