Greaves v R [2020] NSWCCA 140

Greaves v R [2020] NSWCCA 140

The sentencing judge erred in failing to have regard to the need for parity between the applicant and his co-offenders in imposing sentence. The resultant substantial disparity in sentences gave rise to a justifiable sense of grievance. The sentence imposed was quashed and a new sentence was imposed to correct the lack of parity.

Parties
Applicant: Edward Greaves; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 June 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld. Sentence quashed. Applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Parity Principle, Manifest Excess, Aggregate Sentences, Co Offenders
Criminal Law Sentencing Parity Principle Manifest Excess Aggregate Sentences Co Offenders

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 16 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Edward Greaves

Applicant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to consider parity when sentencing the applicant
  2. 2 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred in failing to have regard to the need for parity between the applicant and his co-offenders in imposing sentence. The resultant substantial disparity in sentences gave rise to a justifiable sense of grievance. The sentence imposed was quashed and a new sentence was imposed to correct the lack of parity.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld. Sentence quashed. Applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted.
  • The appeal is upheld.