Regina v HALA aka BLACK [2004] NSWCCA 329

Regina v HALA aka BLACK [2004] NSWCCA 329

Although the sentencing judge erred by sentencing under the old form of s 44 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, the sentence was within the proper sentencing discretion given the seriousness of aggravated robbery, the applicant's recent and troublesome criminal history and breach of bonds. No lesser sentence was warranted in law, so the appeal was dismissed under s 6(3) Criminal Appeal Act 1912.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 September 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against a Sentence Imposed in the District Court
Outcome
Leave granted to appeal against sentence; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['aggravated Robbery' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'non Parole Period' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'prior Criminal History' 'crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act S 44' 'criminal Appeal Act 1912 S 6(3)']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Procedure'] ['aggravated Robbery' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'non Parole Period' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'prior Criminal History' 'crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act S 44' 'criminal Appeal Act 1912 S 6(3)']

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 a Sentence Imposed in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentence of three years and six months' imprisonment with a non-parole period of 12 months was manifestly excessive." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to comply with s 44 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act by not first setting a non-parole period and then the balance of the term.' 'Whether, despite error under s 44, the Court should dismiss the appeal under s 6(3) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 because no other sentence was warranted in law.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sentencing judge erred by sentencing under the old form of s 44 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act, the sentence was within the proper sentencing discretion given the seriousness of aggravated robbery, the applicant's recent and troublesome criminal history and breach of bonds. No lesser sentence was warranted in law, so the appeal was dismissed under s 6(3) Criminal Appeal Act 1912.

Court Disposition

Leave granted to appeal against sentence; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave granted to appeal against sentence.' 'Appeal dismissed.']