Yu v R [2019] NSWCCA 96

Yu v R [2019] NSWCCA 96

The sentencing judge's findings that the applicant lacked remorse, minimised his criminality and had guarded prospects of rehabilitation were open on the material, including the implausible explanations given to the psychologist and the absence of sworn evidence. The applicant's deprived background was noted but no causal or relevant connection with the offending was shown, and no submission on special circumstances was made below. The sentence, having regard to the maximum penalty, Form 1 matters, the applicant's role, drug quantities, prior serious drug conviction and objective seriousness, was not unreasonable or plainly unjust.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 May 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['cultivating a Prohibited Plant Greater Than the Applicable Commercial Quantity' 'form 1 Offences' 'remorse' 'rehabilitation' 'deprived Upbringing' 'special Circumstances' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['cultivating a Prohibited Plant Greater Than the Applicable Commercial Quantity' 'form 1 Offences' 'remorse' 'rehabilitation' 'deprived Upbringing' 'special Circumstances' '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 finding that the applicant lacked remorse.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in finding that the applicant sought to minimise his criminality.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in finding that the applicant had only guarded prospects of rehabilitation.' "Whether the sentencing judge erred in not taking into account the applicant's deprived upbringing and limited education." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to find special circumstances and adjust the ratio between the head sentence and the non-parole period.' 'Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge's findings that the applicant lacked remorse, minimised his criminality and had guarded prospects of rehabilitation were open on the material, including the implausible explanations given to the psychologist and the absence of sworn evidence. The applicant's deprived background was noted but no causal or relevant connection with the offending was shown, and no submission on special circumstances was made below. The sentence, having regard to the maximum penalty, Form 1 matters, the applicant's role, drug quantities, prior serious drug conviction and objective seriousness, was not unreasonable or plainly unjust.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is granted.' 'The appeal is dismissed.']