Kontaxis v R [2021] NSWCCA 72

Kontaxis v R [2021] NSWCCA 72

The applicant failed to establish a warrant for the extension of time to seek leave to appeal against sentence as no sufficient or acceptable explanation for delay was provided and no arguable error or injustice in the original sentence was identified. The asserted fresh or new evidence did not affect the sentencing outcome, and the criticisms advanced were either already considered or properly rejected by the sentencing judge.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 April 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence Out of Time
Outcome
Application for extension of time refused; application for leave to appeal dismissed as incompetent.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'extension of Time' 'fresh and New Evidence' 'sentencing' 'objective and Subjective Factors' 'onerous Prison Conditions' 'exceptional Hardship' 'voluntary Disclosure']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'extension of Time' 'fresh and New Evidence' 'sentencing' 'objective and Subjective Factors' 'onerous Prison Conditions' 'exceptional Hardship' 'voluntary Disclosure']

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 Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence Out of Time

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether leave to appeal against sentence out of time should be granted' "Whether there was error in the sentencing judge's approach to voluntary disclosure" 'Whether exceptional hardship to family justified interference with sentence' 'Whether mental illness diminished moral culpability for sentencing purposes' 'Whether onerous prison conditions justified reduction of sentence' 'Whether the Crown presented incorrect evidence to the sentencing judge']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant failed to establish a warrant for the extension of time to seek leave to appeal against sentence as no sufficient or acceptable explanation for delay was provided and no arguable error or injustice in the original sentence was identified. The asserted fresh or new evidence did not affect the sentencing outcome, and the criticisms advanced were either already considered or properly rejected by the sentencing judge.

Court Disposition

Application for extension of time refused; application for leave to appeal dismissed as incompetent.

Orders

  • ['Refuse an extension of time within which to seek leave to appeal.' 'Dismiss the application for leave to appeal filed on 22 June 2020 as incompetent.']