Slattery v R (No 2) [2023] NSWCCA 171
The conviction on Count 13 was quashed, but its associated limiting term had been wholly concurrent with other terms. The sentencing judge had properly applied the totality principle. There was no anomaly or injustice requiring alteration of the remaining limiting terms under s 7(1) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), and the original sentences were affirmed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 07 July 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal After Remittal Following Partial Success
- Outcome
- Affirmed
- Legal Topics
- ['appeals Against Conviction' 'limiting Terms' 'principle of Totality' 'unfitness to Be Tried' 'special Hearing Procedure']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Appeal After Remittal Following Partial Success
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the limiting terms for remaining convictions should be varied after one qualified finding of guilt was quashed on appeal' 'Proper approach to s 7(1) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW) when only part of the appeal against qualified findings of guilt is successful']
Ratio Decidendi
The conviction on Count 13 was quashed, but its associated limiting term had been wholly concurrent with other terms. The sentencing judge had properly applied the totality principle. There was no anomaly or injustice requiring alteration of the remaining limiting terms under s 7(1) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW), and the original sentences were affirmed.
Court Disposition
Affirmed
Orders
- ['The limiting terms imposed by Syme DCJ on 26 November 2021 are affirmed.']
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