Regina v Treglia [2002] NSWCCA 338

Regina v Treglia [2002] NSWCCA 338

Having regard to the small body of comparable cases and the Judicial Commission statistics, the sentence imposed on the applicant was excessive notwithstanding the seriousness of the perjury and the ten-year maximum penalty. Taking into account the guilty plea, the appropriate sentence was three years imprisonment. Special circumstances existed, given the applicant's age and progress towards rehabilitation, justifying a non-parole period of eighteen months.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 August 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal After Guilty Plea and Sentence in the District Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; District Court sentence quashed; applicant re-sentenced.
Legal Topics
['perjury' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period' 'guilty Plea Discount']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['perjury' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period' 'guilty Plea Discount']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal After Guilty Plea and Sentence in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence of four years imprisonment with a non-parole period of three years for perjury was manifestly excessive.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in declining to find special circumstances.' 'If the sentence was manifestly excessive, what sentence and non-parole period should be imposed.']

Ratio Decidendi

Having regard to the small body of comparable cases and the Judicial Commission statistics, the sentence imposed on the applicant was excessive notwithstanding the seriousness of the perjury and the ten-year maximum penalty. Taking into account the guilty plea, the appropriate sentence was three years imprisonment. Special circumstances existed, given the applicant's age and progress towards rehabilitation, justifying a non-parole period of eighteen months.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; District Court sentence quashed; applicant re-sentenced.

Orders

  • ['The sentence passed in the District Court is quashed.' 'In lieu, the applicant is sentenced to imprisonment for three years, to date from 7 November 2001, with a non-parole period of eighteen months.' 'The applicant is to be released at the expiration of that non-parole period and be subject to the supervision and...