R v NEWMAN [2005] NSWCCA 388

R v NEWMAN [2005] NSWCCA 388

The sentencing judge did not err in declining to find special circumstances or to reduce the further non-parole period. His Honour had backdated the sentences so that a substantial part was concurrent with the existing non-parole period and was entitled to regard any further reduction as inappropriate given the applicant committed repeated break, enter and steal offences, including while on bail, and had a long record of dishonesty offences. The resulting total non-parole period and balance of term were justified by general and personal deterrence, retribution and protection of the community.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal; Leave to Appeal Granted; Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['break, Enter and Steal' 'non Parole Period' 'parole Period' 'statutory Ratio' 'special Circumstances' 'totality' 'recidivism' 'two Judge Bench Authority']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['break, Enter and Steal' 'non Parole Period' 'parole Period' 'statutory Ratio' 'special Circumstances' 'totality' 'recidivism' 'two Judge Bench Authority']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal; Leave to Appeal Granted; Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the relationship between the applicant's non-parole period and parole period was inappropriate." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by not increasing the parole period at the expense of the non-parole period.' "Whether the totality of the sentences imposed for the applicant's offences was excessive or affected by error."]

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err in declining to find special circumstances or to reduce the further non-parole period. His Honour had backdated the sentences so that a substantial part was concurrent with the existing non-parole period and was entitled to regard any further reduction as inappropriate given the applicant committed repeated break, enter and steal offences, including while on bail, and had a long record of dishonesty offences. The resulting total non-parole period and balance of term were justified by general and personal deterrence, retribution and protection of the community.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

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