McKENNA v REGINA [2007] NSWCCA 113

McKENNA v REGINA [2007] NSWCCA 113

The irrational disparity between the applicant’s sentence and that imposed on his co-offender Benischke—given their similar subjective circumstances and culpability—gave rise to a justifiable sense of grievance. Parity required a reduction in the applicant’s sentence to align with Benischke’s, as the sentence imposed was not justified by any legitimate distinction and resentence would not result in an inappropriately low sentence.

Parties
Applicant: Eric Noel McKENNA; Respondent: REGINA
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 May 2007
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence quashed and new sentences imposed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Parity, Equal Justice, Assistance to Authorities, Voluntary Disclosure of Guilt
Criminal Law Sentencing Parity Equal Justice Assistance to Authorities Voluntary Disclosure of Guilt

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 10 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Eric Noel McKENNA

Applicant

REGINA

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Sentence Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed on the applicant gave rise to a justifiable sense of grievance compared to co-offenders
  2. 2 Whether parity in sentencing was properly observed
  3. 3 Whether the applicant's assistance or voluntary disclosure of guilt warranted a discount

Ratio Decidendi

The irrational disparity between the applicant’s sentence and that imposed on his co-offender Benischke—given their similar subjective circumstances and culpability—gave rise to a justifiable sense of grievance. Parity required a reduction in the applicant’s sentence to align with Benischke’s, as the sentence imposed was not justified by any legitimate distinction and resentence would not result in an inappropriately low sentence.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence quashed and new sentences imposed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Appeal allowed