REGINA v Jana MALIK [2005] NSWCCA 334

REGINA v Jana MALIK [2005] NSWCCA 334

The sentencing judge did not err in setting a non-parole period greater than 75 percent of the aggregate head sentence because s44(2) does not prevent such a sentence, and the sentence properly reflected seriousness and the applicant's circumstances.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
12 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave granted; appeal against sentence dismissed
Legal Topics
['break and Enter Offences' 'sentencing' 'aggregate Non Parole Periods' 'crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 S44(2)']
['criminal Law'] ['break and Enter Offences' 'sentencing' 'aggregate Non Parole Periods' 'crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 S44(2)']

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 by imposing an aggregate non-parole period greater than 75% of the aggregate head sentences contrary to s44(2) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err in setting a non-parole period greater than 75 percent of the aggregate head sentence because s44(2) does not prevent such a sentence, and the sentence properly reflected seriousness and the applicant's circumstances.

Court Disposition

Leave granted; appeal against sentence dismissed

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted' 'Appeal against sentence dismissed']