EJDG v R [2012] NSWCCA 251

EJDG v R [2012] NSWCCA 251

Although the sentencing judge misstated the maximum penalty and adopted the approach in Way instead of the later approach in Muldrock, these errors did not materially affect the sentences imposed, and no lesser sentence was warranted in the circumstances.

Parties
Applicant: EJDG; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 November 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Sentence, Determination of Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Sentence, Maximum Penalty Misstatement, Standard Non Parole Period, Sentencing Error
Criminal Law Appeal Against Sentence Maximum Penalty Misstatement Standard Non Parole Period Sentencing Error

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 2 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

EJDG

Applicant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Sentence, Determination of Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sentencing judge erred by misdirecting himself as to the correct maximum penalty for the offences
  2. 2 Whether error in applying standard non-parole period warranted different sentence

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sentencing judge misstated the maximum penalty and adopted the approach in Way instead of the later approach in Muldrock, these errors did not materially affect the sentences imposed, and no lesser sentence was warranted in the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Grant leave to appeal.
  • Dismiss the appeal.