SATORRE v REGINA [2006] NSWCCA 298

SATORRE v REGINA [2006] NSWCCA 298

The sentencing judge made no error in allowing a total fifty per cent discount. The discount was within range and adequately reflected the plea of guilty, contrition, past assistance and future assistance, while maintaining proportionality to the offence. The starting point of thirty-two years was also within range because the offence was a planned, brutal and grave crime involving the deliberate use of acid causing severe injury and death, and the applicant's role was meaningful even though he was not one of the actual attackers. The sentence was not manifestly excessive, so the appeal was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From Sentence Imposed in the Supreme Court by Studdert J on 22 April 2005
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['murder' 'plea of Guilty Discount' 'assistance to Authorities' 'future Assistance' 'protective Custody' 'contrition' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'totality of Criminality' 'degree of Criminality']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['murder' 'plea of Guilty Discount' 'assistance to Authorities' 'future Assistance' 'protective Custody' 'contrition' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'totality of Criminality' 'degree of Criminality']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From Sentence Imposed in the Supreme Court by Studdert J on 22 April 2005

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by allowing a total discount of fifty per cent for plea of guilty, past assistance, contrition and future assistance.' 'Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive, including whether the starting point of thirty-two years was inappropriate.' 'Whether the sentence properly reflected the totality of the criminality, including the scheduled drug supply offence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge made no error in allowing a total fifty per cent discount. The discount was within range and adequately reflected the plea of guilty, contrition, past assistance and future assistance, while maintaining proportionality to the offence. The starting point of thirty-two years was also within range because the offence was a planned, brutal and grave crime involving the deliberate use of acid causing severe injury and death, and the applicant's role was meaningful even though he was not one of the actual attackers. The sentence was not manifestly excessive, so the appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']