DXH (a pseudonym) v R [2023] NSWCCA 140

DXH (a pseudonym) v R [2023] NSWCCA 140

The sentencing judge addressed, either expressly or implicitly, each applicable matter under s 23(2) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) and took into account both the applicant's assistance in the prosecution of the co-offender and his own voluntary disclosure. A greater discount (Ellis discount) was not warranted given the likelihood that police would have identified the applicant from CCTV footage. Thus, the discretion did not miscarry, and no error was established.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 June 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence; Application for Leave to Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'assistance to Authorities' 'discount for Assistance' 'ellis Factor' 'reasons of Judgment']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'assistance to Authorities' 'discount for Assistance' 'ellis Factor' 'reasons of Judgment']

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; Application for Leave to Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge failed to consider matters in each subparagraph of s 23(2) of Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) in deciding whether to impose a lesser penalty for voluntary disclosure and assistance to authorities' 'Whether the applicant was entitled to an additional discount (Ellis discount) for voluntarily disclosing involvement in the offence']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge addressed, either expressly or implicitly, each applicable matter under s 23(2) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) and took into account both the applicant's assistance in the prosecution of the co-offender and his own voluntary disclosure. A greater discount (Ellis discount) was not warranted given the likelihood that police would have identified the applicant from CCTV footage. Thus, the discretion did not miscarry, and no error was established.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Dismiss the appeal.']