DEVINE, Kane Mitchell v R [2009] NSWCCA 261

DEVINE, Kane Mitchell v R [2009] NSWCCA 261

The conviction for dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime had to be quashed because the s 193C(1) offence was strictly summary and the District Court lacked jurisdiction. The robbery sentence involved error because, considering the sentencing proceedings and remarks as a whole, the Court was left with the distinct impression that the sentencing judge overlooked factoring in a 25 per cent discount for the early guilty plea; the special circumstances ground failed, but a lesser sentence was warranted.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From the District Court
Outcome
Conviction on the proceeds of crime charge quashed and remitted to the Local Court; leave to appeal against the robbery sentence granted; appeal allowed; robbery sentence quashed and reduced.
Legal Topics
['dealing With Property Suspected of Being the Proceeds of Crime' 'robbery' 'summary Offence Jurisdiction' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['dealing With Property Suspected of Being the Proceeds of Crime' 'robbery' 'summary Offence Jurisdiction' 'guilty Plea Discount' '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 Conviction and Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal From the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the District Court had jurisdiction to deal with the charge under s 193C(1) of the Crimes Act 1900 where, by operation of s 6 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986, the offence was strictly summary.' "Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to identify, calculate or apply a discount for the utilitarian value of the applicant's early plea of guilty to robbery." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in refusing to make a finding of special circumstances based on rehabilitation prospects or partial accumulation of sentences.' 'Whether a lesser sentence for robbery was warranted at law.']

Ratio Decidendi

The conviction for dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime had to be quashed because the s 193C(1) offence was strictly summary and the District Court lacked jurisdiction. The robbery sentence involved error because, considering the sentencing proceedings and remarks as a whole, the Court was left with the distinct impression that the sentencing judge overlooked factoring in a 25 per cent discount for the early guilty plea; the special circumstances ground failed, but a lesser sentence was warranted.

Court Disposition

Conviction on the proceeds of crime charge quashed and remitted to the Local Court; leave to appeal against the robbery sentence granted; appeal allowed; robbery sentence quashed and reduced.

Orders

  • ['The conviction entered in respect of the offence of dealing with property suspected of being the proceeds of crime is quashed and the matter remitted to the Local Court.' 'Leave to appeal against the sentence imposed in respect of the charge of robbery is granted and the appeal is allowed.' 'The sentence imposed...