Regina v F.F. [2000] NSWCCA 493

Regina v F.F. [2000] NSWCCA 493

The sentencing judge did not commit appealable error in deciding to deal with the applicant according to law. The offence of maliciously causing poison to be taken so as to endanger life, committed against the applicant's mother, was objectively very serious and properly categorised as an adult crime; it was open to the judge to find lack of remorse, and his remarks showed concern for rehabilitation despite imposing a sentence according to law. The House v The King threshold for appellate interference was not met.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Sentencing Severity Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['severity Appeal' 'child Offender' 'whether Matter Should Be Dealt With According to Law' 'maliciously Causing Poison to Be Taken So as to Endanger Life' 'exercise of Sentencing Discretion']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'juvenile Justice'] ['severity Appeal' 'child Offender' 'whether Matter Should Be Dealt With According to Law' 'maliciously Causing Poison to Be Taken So as to Endanger Life' 'exercise of Sentencing Discretion']

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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Sentencing Severity Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in exercising the discretion to deal with the applicant according to law rather than under the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 regime applicable to children.' "Whether the sentencing judge failed to have regard to the principles in s 6 of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987, including the applicant's dependency, immaturity and rehabilitation." 'Whether the sentence involved appealable error under House v The King.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not commit appealable error in deciding to deal with the applicant according to law. The offence of maliciously causing poison to be taken so as to endanger life, committed against the applicant's mother, was objectively very serious and properly categorised as an adult crime; it was open to the judge to find lack of remorse, and his remarks showed concern for rehabilitation despite imposing a sentence according to law. The House v The King threshold for appellate interference was not met.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']