HMP v R [2010] NSWCCA 63

HMP v R [2010] NSWCCA 63

Even accepting certain errors by the sentencing judge, the offences were serious and warranted a custodial sentence. The penalties imposed were at the lower end of severity, reflecting both the objective seriousness and powerful subjective case. No relevant error or manifest excess was evident to justify granting leave to appeal against sentence.

Parties
Applicant: HMP; Respondent: Regina
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence refused
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Children and Young Persons, Appeals
Criminal Law Sentencing Children and Young Persons Appeals

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 7 Authorities cited 20 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 9
Sign in to unlock

Parties

HMP

Applicant

Regina

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether sentencing Judge failed to assess where the offence at count 2 fell in the range in terms of objective seriousness
  2. 2 Whether the test in relation to any departure from the standard non-parole period was wrongly articulated
  3. 3 Whether sentencing Judge impermissibly had regard to the applicant's prior criminal record as an aggravating factor

Ratio Decidendi

Even accepting certain errors by the sentencing judge, the offences were serious and warranted a custodial sentence. The penalties imposed were at the lower end of severity, reflecting both the objective seriousness and powerful subjective case. No relevant error or manifest excess was evident to justify granting leave to appeal against sentence.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence refused

Orders

  • Leave to appeal against sentence refused