Parker v R [2021] NSWCCA 175

Parker v R [2021] NSWCCA 175

The conviction appeal failed because, despite inconsistencies and matters relied on by the applicant, C's evidence and the 4 August 2016 messaging exchange made it open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt on all counts. The sentence appeal succeeded because the sentencing judge's reasons did not expressly or implicitly assess the objective criminality of counts 2 to 11 in a way that could be clearly understood. The sentence was quashed and the applicant was resentenced to an aggregate term of nine years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of five years and nine months.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 August 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal From Convictions by Jury and Sentence Imposed in the District Court of NSW
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed; sentence quashed and applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['unreasonable Verdict' 'child Sexual Offences' 'grooming Child Under 16' 'indecent Assault' 'aggravated Act of Indecency' 'aggravated Sexual Intercourse With Person Under 14' 'objective Seriousness' 'aggregate Sentence' 'breach of Trust by Foster Carer']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['unreasonable Verdict' 'child Sexual Offences' 'grooming Child Under 16' 'indecent Assault' 'aggravated Act of Indecency' 'aggravated Sexual Intercourse With Person Under 14' 'objective Seriousness' 'aggregate Sentence' 'breach of Trust by Foster Carer']

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 Conviction and Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal From Convictions by Jury and Sentence Imposed in the District Court of NSW

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the verdicts in respect of each count were unreasonable.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to assess the objective criminality of counts 2 to 11.' 'Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction appeal failed because, despite inconsistencies and matters relied on by the applicant, C's evidence and the 4 August 2016 messaging exchange made it open to the jury to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt on all counts. The sentence appeal succeeded because the sentencing judge's reasons did not expressly or implicitly assess the objective criminality of counts 2 to 11 in a way that could be clearly understood. The sentence was quashed and the applicant was resentenced to an aggregate term of nine years' imprisonment with a non-parole period of five years and nine months.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal against conviction dismissed; appeal against sentence allowed; sentence quashed and applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal against conviction dismissed.' 'Allow the appeal against the sentence.' 'Quash the sentence imposed by Judge Wells SC in the District Court on 17 December 2019.' 'In lieu, sentence the applicant to an aggregate sentence of imprisonment for nine years commencing 15 November 2018...