REGINA v. VERGARA [1999] NSWCCA 352

REGINA v. VERGARA [1999] NSWCCA 352

The applicant deliberately entered his guilty plea after competent advice, with interpreter assistance and written acknowledgment of the strength of the Crown case, virtual inevitability of conviction, maximum penalty, and sentence benefit of an early plea. No rational or tenable defence, intoxication issue, or other matter impugned the integrity of the plea, so no error was shown in the discretionary refusal to permit withdrawal. As to sentence, the sentencing judge considered the plea, objective seriousness, victim impact, subjective circumstances, mental state, diminished responsibility, and deterrence, and no error of principle or result was shown.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 October 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Determination of Applications for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal against conviction refused; leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
['withdrawal of Guilty Plea' 'soliciting Murder' 'leave to Appeal Against Conviction' 'leave to Appeal Against Sentence' 'exercise of Discretion' 'diminished Responsibility and Mental State in Sentencing']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['withdrawal of Guilty Plea' 'soliciting Murder' 'leave to Appeal Against Conviction' 'leave to Appeal Against Sentence' 'exercise of Discretion' 'diminished Responsibility and Mental State in Sentencing']

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 Application for Leave to Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Determination of Applications for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the District Court judge erred in refusing to permit withdrawal of the applicant's guilty plea." 'Whether the integrity of the guilty plea was bona fide in question so that there was a real question to be tried.' "Whether the sentence imposed for soliciting the murder of the applicant's former de facto wife disclosed error."]

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant deliberately entered his guilty plea after competent advice, with interpreter assistance and written acknowledgment of the strength of the Crown case, virtual inevitability of conviction, maximum penalty, and sentence benefit of an early plea. No rational or tenable defence, intoxication issue, or other matter impugned the integrity of the plea, so no error was shown in the discretionary refusal to permit withdrawal. As to sentence, the sentencing judge considered the plea, objective seriousness, victim impact, subjective circumstances, mental state, diminished responsibility, and deterrence, and no error of principle or result was shown.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal against conviction refused; leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The application for leave to appeal insofar as it concerns the issue of change of plea is refused.' 'The application for leave to appeal in relation to the sentence is granted but the appeal is dismissed.']