R v Shorten [2005] NSWCCA 106

R v Shorten [2005] NSWCCA 106

The sentencing judge took into account the delay and applied the principle of totality appropriately, demonstrated understanding and flexibility, and did not err. The delay was not as lengthy as in comparable cases, and there was no evidence the applicant progressed towards rehabilitation or was left in suspense during the relevant period.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'delay in Prosecution' 'breaking, Entering and Stealing']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'delay in Prosecution' 'breaking, Entering and Stealing']

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 / Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['whether sentencing judge failed to adequately take into account the delay in prosecution']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge took into account the delay and applied the principle of totality appropriately, demonstrated understanding and flexibility, and did not err. The delay was not as lengthy as in comparable cases, and there was no evidence the applicant progressed towards rehabilitation or was left in suspense during the relevant period.

Court Disposition

leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['leave to appeal against sentence granted' 'appeal dismissed']