Sorbello v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 225

Sorbello v Regina [2006] NSWCCA 225

The applicant had a legitimate grievance at being sentenced with a higher starting point than M, despite M being the supplier and both offences being part of the same transaction. The parity principle required that the applicant not be sentenced more harshly than M. The sentence imposed at first instance was quashed and a lower sentence, with a reduced non-parole period and balance of term, was imposed to align with parity.

Parties
Applicant: Frank Sorbello; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 July 2006
Procedural Posture
Sentence Appeal / Appeal Before Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted. Appeal allowed. Applicant re-sentenced.
Legal Topics
Sentence Appeal, Parity Principle, Equal Justice, Commercial Quantity Drug Supply
Criminal Law Sentence Appeal Parity Principle Equal Justice Commercial Quantity Drug Supply

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 2 Authorities cited 4 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Frank Sorbello

Applicant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Sentence Appeal / Appeal Before Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the parity principle applies between the applicant and M regarding disparity of sentences
  2. 2 Whether the applicant had a legitimate grievance due to disparity of sentence imposed compared to M

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant had a legitimate grievance at being sentenced with a higher starting point than M, despite M being the supplier and both offences being part of the same transaction. The parity principle required that the applicant not be sentenced more harshly than M. The sentence imposed at first instance was quashed and a lower sentence, with a reduced non-parole period and balance of term, was imposed to align with parity.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted. Appeal allowed. Applicant re-sentenced.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted and appeal allowed.
  • Sentence passed by Nield DCJ on 4 February 2005 is quashed.