R v Hanslow [2002] NSWCCA 161

R v Hanslow [2002] NSWCCA 161

The sentencing judge erred in following a sentencing practice that pre-dated legislative changes requiring a two-stage process and by imposing a manifestly excessive sentence for both counts, warranting re-sentencing.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Applicant: James Anthony Hanslow
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 May 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence; Application for Extension of Time
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence quashed; applicant re-sentenced
Legal Topics
Application for Extension of Time, Appeal Against Severity of Sentence, Periodic Detention, Revocation of Order, Manifestly Excessive Sentence
Criminal Law Sentencing Application for Extension of Time Appeal Against Severity of Sentence Periodic Detention Revocation of Order 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 2 Authorities cited 9 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

James Anthony Hanslow

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence; Application for Extension of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to fix a minimum and additional term
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to give reasons for not fixing a minimum term
  3. 3 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred in following a sentencing practice that pre-dated legislative changes requiring a two-stage process and by imposing a manifestly excessive sentence for both counts, warranting re-sentencing.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence quashed; applicant re-sentenced

Orders

  • Leave to appeal out of time granted.
  • Leave to appeal against sentence granted.