Mammone v R [2013] NSWCCA 95

Mammone v R [2013] NSWCCA 95

The sentencing judge's assessment that the manufacturing and supply offences were of mid-range objective gravity was not unreasonable or plainly unjust. Disparity in sentencing with co-offenders was justified given applicants' role, criminal history, and circumstances. There was no legal error in sentence severity or misapplication of parity principles.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 May 2013
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal sentence granted; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'parity' 'objective Gravity of Offence' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'sentencing Discretion']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'parity' 'objective Gravity of Offence' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' '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

Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence was too severe or manifestly excessive' 'Whether parity principles were breached in comparison with sentences of co-offenders' 'Assessment of objective gravity of the manufacturing and supply offences']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge's assessment that the manufacturing and supply offences were of mid-range objective gravity was not unreasonable or plainly unjust. Disparity in sentencing with co-offenders was justified given applicants' role, criminal history, and circumstances. There was no legal error in sentence severity or misapplication of parity principles.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal sentence granted; appeal dismissed

Orders

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