Pantelakis v R [2019] NSWCCA 78

Pantelakis v R [2019] NSWCCA 78

The appeal failed because the sentencing judge made no demonstrated error. The indicated sentences for the s 166 offences were not shown to be excessive, particularly where the aggregate sentence increased the indicated sentence for the principal offence by only one month. The judge was entitled to consider the appellant's prior criminal history, offending while on bail, and protection of the public, while also taking account of his schizophrenia, reduced moral culpability and heavier custodial burden. The judge expressly took the Form 1 offence into account and was not required to specify how or to what extent. The small accumulation applied did not offend totality, and the aggregate...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 March 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Aggregate Sentence Imposed in the District Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'aggregate Sentence' 'manifest Excess' 'form 1 Offence' 'section 166 Certificate Offences' 'objective Seriousness' 'mental Illness in Sentencing' 'totality and Accumulation']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Procedure'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'aggregate Sentence' 'manifest Excess' 'form 1 Offence' 'section 166 Certificate Offences' 'objective Seriousness' 'mental Illness in Sentencing' 'totality and Accumulation']

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

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge failed to assess the criminality or objective seriousness of the offences dealt with under s 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 (NSW).' 'Whether the sentencing judge set excessive starting points for the s 166 offences.' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to indicate how the Form 1 offence was taken into account.' 'Whether the aggregate sentence imposed was manifestly excessive in all the circumstances.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the sentencing judge made no demonstrated error. The indicated sentences for the s 166 offences were not shown to be excessive, particularly where the aggregate sentence increased the indicated sentence for the principal offence by only one month. The judge was entitled to consider the appellant's prior criminal history, offending while on bail, and protection of the public, while also taking account of his schizophrenia, reduced moral culpability and heavier custodial burden. The judge expressly took the Form 1 offence into account and was not required to specify how or to what extent. The small accumulation applied did not offend totality, and the aggregate...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

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