Frlanov v R [2018] NSWCCA 267

Frlanov v R [2018] NSWCCA 267

Leave was refused because none of the asserted errors was established. Daily reporting to a police station about half a kilometre from the applicant's residence was an imposition but not particularly onerous or remotely like custody, and the judge had not been asked to take it into account. The sentencing remarks were read as accepting the Crown's submission that the prior record was not an aggravating factor. The judge in fact allowed a 25% discount for the utilitarian value of the pleas despite the withdrawn and re-entered plea. Having regard to the seriousness of the indictable offences, their maximum penalties, and the applicant's personal circumstances, the individual indicative...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the District Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence refused.
Legal Topics
['drug Supply' 'possession of Prohibited Weapon' 'onerous Bail Conditions' 'prior Convictions' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'manifest Excess' 'mental Illness and Substance Use Disorder']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['drug Supply' 'possession of Prohibited Weapon' 'onerous Bail Conditions' 'prior Convictions' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'manifest Excess' 'mental Illness and Substance Use Disorder']

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 / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred by not taking into account the applicant's daily reporting bail condition." "Whether the sentencing judge erroneously treated the applicant's criminal record as an aggravating factor." 'Whether the applicant received the proper 25% discount for his guilty plea to the supply charge.' 'Whether the aggregate sentence was unreasonable or plainly unjust.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave was refused because none of the asserted errors was established. Daily reporting to a police station about half a kilometre from the applicant's residence was an imposition but not particularly onerous or remotely like custody, and the judge had not been asked to take it into account. The sentencing remarks were read as accepting the Crown's submission that the prior record was not an aggravating factor. The judge in fact allowed a 25% discount for the utilitarian value of the pleas despite the withdrawn and re-entered plea. Having regard to the seriousness of the indictable offences, their maximum penalties, and the applicant's personal circumstances, the individual indicative...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence refused.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against sentence refused.']