R v Chan [2000] NSWCCA 345

R v Chan [2000] NSWCCA 345

The sentencing judge did not err by weighing the applicant’s previous good character less in light of multiple serious offences; did not misapply Pearce v The Queen regarding cumulative/concurrent sentencing; and the sentences imposed were not manifestly excessive given the seriousness of the offences.

Parties
Applicant: Colin Shu Wing Chan; Respondent: Regina (The Crown)
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 August 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Totality Principle, Obtaining Money by Deception, Fraud, Mitigating Factors
Criminal Law Sentencing Totality Principle Obtaining Money by Deception Fraud Mitigating Factors

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Colin Shu Wing Chan

Applicant

Regina (The Crown)

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in giving insufficient weight to the applicant's previous good character
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judge misapplied the totality principle under Pearce v The Queen
  3. 3 Whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err by weighing the applicant’s previous good character less in light of multiple serious offences; did not misapply Pearce v The Queen regarding cumulative/concurrent sentencing; and the sentences imposed were not manifestly excessive given the seriousness of the offences.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal against sentence granted
  • Appeal dismissed