REGINA v CRAMP [2004] NSWCCA 264

REGINA v CRAMP [2004] NSWCCA 264

The sentencing judge erred by having additional regard to aggravating factors (actual violence and substantial harm) which were elements of the offence, thus warranting appellate intervention and resentencing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 July 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence set aside; applicant resentenced
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'aggravating Factors' 'special Circumstances' 'technical Error in Sentencing']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'aggravating Factors' 'special Circumstances' 'technical Error in Sentencing']

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 / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Was the sentence manifestly excessive?' 'Did the sentencing judge properly reflect special circumstances in the non-parole period?' 'Did the sentencing judge fail to comply with s44 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999?' 'Did the judge improperly take into account applications for apprehended violence orders?' 'Did the judge double-count aggravating factors that are elements of the offence?']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred by having additional regard to aggravating factors (actual violence and substantial harm) which were elements of the offence, thus warranting appellate intervention and resentencing.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence set aside; applicant resentenced

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted' 'Appeal allowed' 'Sentence of Knight DCJ passed on 3 October 2003 set aside' 'Applicant sentenced to a term of imprisonment of seven years with a non-parole period of five years']