REGINA v BEALE [2001] NSWCCA 261

REGINA v BEALE [2001] NSWCCA 261

Leave to appeal was granted because, in the circumstances of the applicant's serious drug problem and genuine prospects of rehabilitation, the period allowed for supervised rehabilitation after imprisonment for break, enter and steal was demonstrably insufficient and the sentence was manifestly excessive in that respect. The fixed term for steal from the person was not disturbed. The sentence for break, enter and steal was quashed and replaced with a three-year term with a 15-month non-parole period, allowing a longer period of supervised rehabilitation.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 July 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentences
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal against the fixed term for steal from the person dismissed; appeal against the sentence for break, enter and steal allowed and that sentence quashed and replaced.
Legal Topics
['leave to Appeal' 'severity Appeal' 'manifest Excess' 'non Parole Period' 'supervised Rehabilitation' 'partial Accumulation of Sentences' 'drug Addiction and Rehabilitation']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['leave to Appeal' 'severity Appeal' 'manifest Excess' 'non Parole Period' 'supervised Rehabilitation' 'partial Accumulation of Sentences' 'drug Addiction and Rehabilitation']

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 Severity of Sentences

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal should be granted against the severity of two sentences of imprisonment.' 'Whether the sentence for break, enter and steal provided an inadequate period of supervision for rehabilitation after release.' 'Whether the appeal against the fixed term for steal from the person should be dismissed.' 'Whether an order should be made for release on parole on expiry of the non-parole period under s 50 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was granted because, in the circumstances of the applicant's serious drug problem and genuine prospects of rehabilitation, the period allowed for supervised rehabilitation after imprisonment for break, enter and steal was demonstrably insufficient and the sentence was manifestly excessive in that respect. The fixed term for steal from the person was not disturbed. The sentence for break, enter and steal was quashed and replaced with a three-year term with a 15-month non-parole period, allowing a longer period of supervised rehabilitation.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal against the fixed term for steal from the person dismissed; appeal against the sentence for break, enter and steal allowed and that sentence quashed and replaced.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' "The appeal against a fixed term of two years' imprisonment in respect of the count of steal from the person be dismissed." 'The appeal against the sentence for break, enter and steal be quashed.' 'In lieu of the quashed sentence, the applicant be sentenced to a term of three years...