Irwin v R [2021] NSWCCA 172

Irwin v R [2021] NSWCCA 172

The appeal failed because the sentencing judge's ex tempore remarks, read as a whole, recited the relevant facts and sufficiently disclosed the reasoning path for the conclusions on objective seriousness; no relevant omission, irrelevant reliance, manifest excess or House error was shown. The applicant's ERISP statements did not materially assist authorities: they expressed only a possibility of penetration, the evidence of offending and the inference of intent were otherwise overwhelming, assistance under s 23 was not raised below, and neither Ellis nor s 23 required a further sentencing reduction.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 July 2021
Procedural Posture
Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence Imposed in the District Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['sexual Offences Against Children' 'child Protection Register Reporting Obligations' 'objective Seriousness' 'assistance to Authorities' 'discount for Guilty Plea' 'sentence Appeal']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['sexual Offences Against Children' 'child Protection Register Reporting Obligations' 'objective Seriousness' 'assistance to Authorities' 'discount for Guilty Plea' 'sentence Appeal']

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

Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence Imposed in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to provide reasons for findings as to the objective seriousness of the offences.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to afford the applicant any benefit for admissions to police in relation to Sequence 5 pursuant to R v Ellis, s 23 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW), or as evidence of remorse.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the sentencing judge's ex tempore remarks, read as a whole, recited the relevant facts and sufficiently disclosed the reasoning path for the conclusions on objective seriousness; no relevant omission, irrelevant reliance, manifest excess or House error was shown. The applicant's ERISP statements did not materially assist authorities: they expressed only a possibility of penetration, the evidence of offending and the inference of intent were otherwise overwhelming, assistance under s 23 was not raised below, and neither Ellis nor s 23 required a further sentencing reduction.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

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