Stein v R [2023] NSWCCA 324

Stein v R [2023] NSWCCA 324

The sentencing judge did not err in the assessment of the objective seriousness or the applicant's disabilities, properly weighed childhood deprivation and prospects of rehabilitation, correctly attributed weight to the harm to the victim, and set an appropriate sentence within the available range. No error of the kind justifying appellate intervention was demonstrated. Appeal dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 December 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed (after granting leave to appeal)
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'assessment of Objective Seriousness' 'sentencing for Offenders With Disabilities' 'weight Given to Victim Impact' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'assessment of Objective Seriousness' 'sentencing for Offenders With Disabilities' 'weight Given to Victim Impact' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence']

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 / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the objective seriousness of the offences' "Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing applicant's disability" "Whether the sentencing judge erred by having insufficient regard to applicant's history of early childhood deprivation" "Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the applicant's prospects of rehabilitation and likelihood of reoffending" 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by attributing too much weight to harm to the victim' 'Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err in the assessment of the objective seriousness or the applicant's disabilities, properly weighed childhood deprivation and prospects of rehabilitation, correctly attributed weight to the harm to the victim, and set an appropriate sentence within the available range. No error of the kind justifying appellate intervention was demonstrated. Appeal dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed (after granting leave to appeal)

Orders

  • ['Grant the applicant leave to appeal against the sentence imposed upon him on 13 May 2022.' 'Dismiss the appeal.']