Regina v Karaman [2002] NSWCCA 48

Regina v Karaman [2002] NSWCCA 48

The respondent's undertakings required him to give evidence truthfully and frankly in accordance with his police statements. At Saltan's trials he repudiated the substance of those statements and his evidence was obstructive of the Crown case, with a total failure to give the promised evidence in the second trial. Because the sentencing discount was expressly for the future promise to give evidence, and that undertaking was not fulfilled, s5DA was engaged and the sentence for aggravated robbery with wounding should be varied to remove the unjustified discount, while taking account of relevant resentencing factors.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 March 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Crown Appeal Pursuant to S5 DA of the Criminal Appeal Act Against a Sentence Reduced for an Undertaking to Assist Law Enforcement Authorities
Outcome
Crown appeal allowed; respondent resentenced.
Legal Topics
['crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'discount for Future Assistance' 'failure to Fulfil Undertaking to Give Evidence' 'resentencing' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'criminal Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'discount for Future Assistance' 'failure to Fulfil Undertaking to Give Evidence' 'resentencing' 'non Parole Period']

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 Sentence Appeal / Crown Appeal Pursuant to S5 DA of the Criminal Appeal Act Against a Sentence Reduced for an Undertaking to Assist Law Enforcement Authorities

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the respondent failed wholly or partly to fulfil undertakings to give evidence truthfully and frankly in accordance with his police statements.' 'Whether the sentence should be varied to remove a discount given for promised future assistance.' "Whether any practical value from the respondent's statements or the conviction of Ahmet Saltan meant the undertaking was fulfilled or justified retaining a discount." 'Whether special circumstances or parity considerations justified a lesser sentence or dismissal of the Crown appeal.']

Ratio Decidendi

The respondent's undertakings required him to give evidence truthfully and frankly in accordance with his police statements. At Saltan's trials he repudiated the substance of those statements and his evidence was obstructive of the Crown case, with a total failure to give the promised evidence in the second trial. Because the sentencing discount was expressly for the future promise to give evidence, and that undertaking was not fulfilled, s5DA was engaged and the sentence for aggravated robbery with wounding should be varied to remove the unjustified discount, while taking account of relevant resentencing factors.

Court Disposition

Crown appeal allowed; respondent resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Crown appeal allowed.' 'Sentence imposed on 29 May 1998 for aggravated robbery with wounding quashed.' 'In lieu thereof the respondent be sentenced, taking into account the matters on Form 1, to imprisonment for twelve years to commence from 9 October 1997 and a non-parole period of nine years also commencing from...