CRANSHAW v REGINA [2009] NSWCCA 80

CRANSHAW v REGINA [2009] NSWCCA 80

The sentencing judge's assessment of the applicant's criminality, including its relativity to JOD and Mrillo, was open on the evidence, and full time custody was the only available sentencing option. However, after finding special circumstances, the sentencing judge effectively failed to give real effect to that finding because the non-parole period remained 74% of the total term. The appropriate correction was to reduce the total effective non-parole period by four months by resentencing on sequence 205, while leaving the total term unchanged.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 August 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal From Sentences Imposed by the District Court of New South Wales; Leave Granted and Appeal Determined
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; District Court sentence for sequence 205 set aside; applicant resentenced so that the total effective non-parole period was reduced by four months while the total term remained three years and ten months.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'manifest Excess' 'obtaining Money by Deception' 'attempt to Obtain Money by Deception' 'false Instruments' 'organised Crime Syndicate' 'parity Principle' 'co Offenders' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Procedure'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'manifest Excess' 'obtaining Money by Deception' 'attempt to Obtain Money by Deception' 'false Instruments' 'organised Crime Syndicate' 'parity Principle' 'co Offenders' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period']

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 Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal From Sentences Imposed by the District Court of New South Wales; Leave Granted and Appeal Determined

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences imposed on 5 June 2008 were manifestly excessive.' "Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the applicant's objective criminality and its relativity to other syndicate participants, including JOD and Mrillo." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by not expressly considering alternatives to full time custody.' 'Whether the sentencing judge adequately varied the statutory ratio after finding special circumstances.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge's assessment of the applicant's criminality, including its relativity to JOD and Mrillo, was open on the evidence, and full time custody was the only available sentencing option. However, after finding special circumstances, the sentencing judge effectively failed to give real effect to that finding because the non-parole period remained 74% of the total term. The appropriate correction was to reduce the total effective non-parole period by four months by resentencing on sequence 205, while leaving the total term unchanged.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; District Court sentence for sequence 205 set aside; applicant resentenced so that the total effective non-parole period was reduced by four months while the total term remained three years and ten months.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Appeal upheld.' 'The sentences imposed by the District Court on 5 June 2008 in respect of the offence, sequence 205 (and the matters on the Form 1 in relation to that offence), be set aside.' 'The applicant be re-sentenced in respect of the offence of obtaining a financial advantage in the...