Riggio v R [2015] NSWCCA 223

Riggio v R [2015] NSWCCA 223

The sentencing judge did not err in imposing identical indicative sentences for two similar offences or in considering prior offending; there was no impermissible 'blanket assessment' and the prior convictions were used appropriately.

Parties
Applicant: Fernando Riggio; Respondent: The Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused
Legal Topics
Appeal, Sentencing, Supply of Prohibited Drug, Aggregate Sentence, Indicative Sentences, Prior Offending
Criminal Law Appeal Sentencing Supply of Prohibited Drug Aggregate Sentence Indicative Sentences Prior Offending

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 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 13
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Fernando Riggio

Applicant

The Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred by adopting a blanket assessment with identical indicative sentences for two offences
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judge erred by using the applicant's prior offending to increase the objective seriousness of the offences

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err in imposing identical indicative sentences for two similar offences or in considering prior offending; there was no impermissible 'blanket assessment' and the prior convictions were used appropriately.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused

Orders

  • Leave to appeal be refused