DL v R [2018] NSWCCA 302

DL v R [2018] NSWCCA 302

Given the error in applying the standard non-parole period, the appellant must be resentenced according to the prevailing law, which does not mandate a standard non-parole period for offenders under 18 at the time of offence. The appellant's youth, mental state (probable psychosis), absence of prior convictions, and special circumstances of imprisonment—including the adverse impact of custody—justify a lesser sentence than was originally imposed. On these grounds, a sentence with a non-parole period of 13 years and a further term of 5 years is warranted.

Parties
Appellant: DL; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Resentencing Appeal After High Court Remitter
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Original sentence set aside. Appellant resentenced.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Appeal Against Sentence, Standard Non Parole Period, Juvenile Offender, Mental Illness and Sentencing, Resentencing Law, Application of Amended Sentencing Law, Comparative Sentences
Criminal Law Sentencing Appeal Against Sentence Standard Non Parole Period Juvenile Offender Mental Illness and Sentencing Resentencing Law Application of Amended Sentencing Law +1 more

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 4 Authorities cited 35 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

DL

Appellant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Resentencing Appeal After High Court Remitter

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether a lesser sentence is warranted in law for the appellant's conviction of murder given changes in sentencing law and the standard non-parole period not applying to juveniles
  2. 2 Correct legal principles to apply upon resentencing, including whether amendments to sentencing law after initial sentence but favorable to offender should apply
  3. 3 Proper consideration of mental illness, youth, and post-sentencing conduct in fixing a fresh sentence

Ratio Decidendi

Given the error in applying the standard non-parole period, the appellant must be resentenced according to the prevailing law, which does not mandate a standard non-parole period for offenders under 18 at the time of offence. The appellant's youth, mental state (probable psychosis), absence of prior convictions, and special circumstances of imprisonment—including the adverse impact of custody—justify a lesser sentence than was originally imposed. On these grounds, a sentence with a non-parole period of 13 years and a further term of 5 years is warranted.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Original sentence set aside. Appellant resentenced.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed and the sentence imposed on 14 November 2008 is set aside.
  • The offender is resentenced to a non-parole period of 13 years to date from 19 July 2005, with a further term of 5 years, giving a sentence of 18 years imprisonment.