Regina v Herceg [2001] NSWCCA 242
Even if an error occurred in failing to expressly determine the applicable maximum penalty under s 90A, no lesser sentence would be justified; disparity between applicant's sentence and those of co-offenders was warranted on the facts and roles; the proper maximum penalty applicable was 20 years as substantial injury was sustained.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 25 June 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Determination of Substantive Appeal
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['sentencing' 'maximum Penalty Determination' 'parity of Sentence With Co Offenders' "interpretation of 'substantial Injury' Under S90 a Crimes Act"]
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Determination of Substantive Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether there was undue disparity between sentences imposed on applicant and co-offenders' "Whether sentencing judge erred in not determining or expressing the applicable maximum penalty under s 90A Crimes Act based on whether victims sustained 'substantial injury'"]
Ratio Decidendi
Even if an error occurred in failing to expressly determine the applicable maximum penalty under s 90A, no lesser sentence would be justified; disparity between applicant's sentence and those of co-offenders was warranted on the facts and roles; the proper maximum penalty applicable was 20 years as substantial injury was sustained.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed
Orders
- ['Application for leave to appeal granted' 'Appeal dismissed']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment