FB v R [2014] NSWCCA 282

FB v R [2014] NSWCCA 282

Although a Muldrock error was conceded in the application of sentencing principles, the Court, considering the objective seriousness of the offence and subjective features of the appellant, was not persuaded a lesser sentence than that substituted by the Court of Criminal Appeal is warranted and therefore dismissed the appeal.

Parties
Appellant: FB; Crown: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 December 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence Following Reference Under S 78 Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 (nsw)
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Sentence, Muldrock Error, Standard Non Parole Periods, Crown Appeal, Objective Seriousness, Manifest Inadequacy of Sentence
Criminal Law Appeal Against Sentence Muldrock Error Standard Non Parole Periods Crown Appeal Objective Seriousness Manifest Inadequacy of Sentence

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 3 Authorities cited 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

FB

Appellant

Regina

Crown

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence Following Reference Under S 78 Crimes (appeal and Review) Act 2001 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence was affected by the Muldrock error
  2. 2 Whether any lesser sentence is warranted under s 6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW)
  3. 3 Approach to appeals following Crown appeal decisions

Ratio Decidendi

Although a Muldrock error was conceded in the application of sentencing principles, the Court, considering the objective seriousness of the offence and subjective features of the appellant, was not persuaded a lesser sentence than that substituted by the Court of Criminal Appeal is warranted and therefore dismissed the appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed