REGINA v. CAMPBELL [2005] NSWCCA 125

REGINA v. CAMPBELL [2005] NSWCCA 125

The application was dismissed because the sentencing judge expressly took into account the applicant's abstinence from alcohol, good prospects of rehabilitation, unlikelihood of re-offending, prior good character, age, remorse and guilty plea, and balanced those matters against very serious aggravating features. The offences were properly characterised as within the worst category of aggravated indecent assaults, and the effective total sentence of seven years imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years was not manifestly excessive. The apparent calculation errors on counts five and six did not warrant revising the total effective sentence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Application After Sentence in the District Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Application dismissed.
Legal Topics
['aggravated Indecent Assault' 'assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' 'sexual Offences Against a Child' 'delay Between Offending and Sentencing' 'rehabilitation' 'manifest Excess' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['aggravated Indecent Assault' 'assault Occasioning Actual Bodily Harm' 'sexual Offences Against a Child' 'delay Between Offending and Sentencing' 'rehabilitation' 'manifest Excess' '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 Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Application After Sentence in the District Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to give sufficient weight to the applicant's rehabilitation during the delay between offending and sentencing." 'Whether the effective total sentence of seven years imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years was manifestly excessive.' 'Whether an apparent calculation error on counts five and six warranted intervention in the total effective sentence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The application was dismissed because the sentencing judge expressly took into account the applicant's abstinence from alcohol, good prospects of rehabilitation, unlikelihood of re-offending, prior good character, age, remorse and guilty plea, and balanced those matters against very serious aggravating features. The offences were properly characterised as within the worst category of aggravated indecent assaults, and the effective total sentence of seven years imprisonment with a non-parole period of four years was not manifestly excessive. The apparent calculation errors on counts five and six did not warrant revising the total effective sentence.

Court Disposition

Application dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Application dismissed.']