Trejos v R [2017] NSWCCA 122
Errors in aggravating factors and in stating the maximum penalty were established, requiring resentencing; upon resentencing, considering objective and subjective factors, a less severe sentence was not warranted in law and the appeal should be dismissed.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 02 June 2017
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Sentence Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Disposition
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal against sentence is granted; appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['sentencing' 'commercial Drug Supply' 'dealing With Proceeds of Crime' 'aggravating and Mitigating Factors' 'maximum Penalty Errors' 'principle of Totality' 'concurrent and Cumulative Sentencing']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Disposition
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge wrongly took into account a matter of aggravation (public safety)' 'Whether the sentencing judge incorrectly stated the maximum penalty for supply offences' 'Whether grounds of appeal are made out such that resentencing is required' 'Whether a lesser sentence is warranted in law']
Ratio Decidendi
Errors in aggravating factors and in stating the maximum penalty were established, requiring resentencing; upon resentencing, considering objective and subjective factors, a less severe sentence was not warranted in law and the appeal should be dismissed.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal against sentence is granted; appeal dismissed.
Orders
- ['Leave to appeal against sentence is granted.' 'The appeal is dismissed.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment