Leese v R [2007] NSWCCA 108

Leese v R [2007] NSWCCA 108

The sentencing judge made no error in concluding that full-time custody was required. The reference to community horror was treated as reflecting that right-minded members of the community would regard the offence as requiring denunciation by imprisonment, not as an irrelevant consideration. The judge distinguished the applicant's role from the co-offender's role, and the sentence was not manifestly excessive having regard to the significant objective criminality, the standard non-parole period as a guidepost, the offence being committed while on a good behaviour bond, and the Form 1 matter.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 April 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['sentence Appeal' 'aggravated Break Enter and Intimidate' 'full Time Custodial Sentence' 'irrelevant Consideration' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'form 1 Offence' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['sentence Appeal' 'aggravated Break Enter and Intimidate' 'full Time Custodial Sentence' 'irrelevant Consideration' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'form 1 Offence' 'manifest Excess']

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

Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in concluding that full-time custody was the only available sentencing option.' 'Whether the sentencing judge took an irrelevant consideration into account by saying the community would be horrified if anything other than a full-time custodial sentence were imposed.' 'Whether the sentencing judge confused the applicant\'s conduct with that of the co-offender by using the word "invade".' 'Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge made no error in concluding that full-time custody was required. The reference to community horror was treated as reflecting that right-minded members of the community would regard the offence as requiring denunciation by imprisonment, not as an irrelevant consideration. The judge distinguished the applicant's role from the co-offender's role, and the sentence was not manifestly excessive having regard to the significant objective criminality, the standard non-parole period as a guidepost, the offence being committed while on a good behaviour bond, and the Form 1 matter.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is refused.']