Mansweto v R [2018] NSWCCA 232

Mansweto v R [2018] NSWCCA 232

The circumstances relied upon did not establish apprehended bias because the sentencing judge's criticisms and directions were explicable as procedural responses to late or unserved defence material and did not indicate favouritism, hostility, or prejudgment. However, the aggregate sentence was manifestly excessive:...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; aggregate sentence quashed; applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['dangerous Driving Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm' 'apprehended Bias' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'form 1 Offences' 'unregistered and Uninsured Motor Vehicle' 'driver Licence Disqualification']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'appellate Review'] ['dangerous Driving Occasioning Grievous Bodily Harm' 'apprehended Bias' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'form 1 Offences' 'unregistered and Uninsured Motor Vehicle' 'driver Licence Disqualification']

Source-derived case record

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 Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in refusing to recuse himself on the ground of apprehended bias.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in the approach to the matters on the s 166 certificate.' 'Whether the aggregate sentence was manifestly excessive.' "Whether the applicant's moral culpability was properly assessed as high."]

Ratio Decidendi

The circumstances relied upon did not establish apprehended bias because the sentencing judge's criticisms and directions were explicable as procedural responses to late or unserved defence material and did not indicate favouritism, hostility, or prejudgment. However, the aggregate sentence was manifestly excessive: the applicant's failure to secure the steering wheel was a serious but forgotten pre-driving omission, the speeding was not an extreme departure and was not found to have caused the loss of control, the unregistered and uninsured status was not causative and did not increase objective seriousness, and although the injuries were grave they did not make this a worst-case...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal upheld; aggregate sentence quashed; applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'The appeal is upheld.' 'The aggregate sentence imposed in the District Court on 20 June 2017 for counts 1 and 2 is quashed.' 'In lieu thereof the applicant is sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment comprising a non-parole period of 1 year and 4 months commencing on 20 June 2017...