R v Galati [2003] NSWCCA 148

R v Galati [2003] NSWCCA 148

While the sentencing judge took into account the guilty pleas, the sentences did not demonstrably reflect any allowance for the first period of pre-sentence custody. This was an error requiring the sentences to be set aside and re-imposed to give credit for the pre-sentence custody.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 May 2003
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal against sentence allowed
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'drugs' 'guilty Plea' 'utilitarian Value' 'pre Sentence Custody' 'sentence Calculation']

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 / Appeal Against Sentence

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to discount the applicant's sentences for the utilitarian value of his guilty pleas" "Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to demonstrably take into account the applicant's pre-sentence custody from 16 October 2001 to 11 December 2001"]

Ratio Decidendi

While the sentencing judge took into account the guilty pleas, the sentences did not demonstrably reflect any allowance for the first period of pre-sentence custody. This was an error requiring the sentences to be set aside and re-imposed to give credit for the pre-sentence custody.

Court Disposition

Appeal against sentence allowed

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted' 'Appeal against sentences allowed' 'Original sentences quashed' 'For count one, fixed term of imprisonment of one year commencing 23 November 2001' 'For count two, fixed term of imprisonment of one year commencing 23 November 2001' 'For count three, term of imprisonment of three years with...