R v JD [2018] NSWCCA 233

R v JD [2018] NSWCCA 233

The aggregate sentence imposed on JD was manifestly inadequate as it failed to reflect the objective seriousness, aggravating features, high criminality, effect on victims over a prolonged period, limited prospects for rehabilitation, and relevant sentencing principles. The discounts for assistance and the non-parole period were excessive, and special circumstances were identified in a way that involved double counting. The appeal was allowed and the respondent resentenced to an increased aggregate term.

Parties
Appellant Crown: Regina; Respondent: JD
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appeal – Resentencing
Outcome
Crown appeal allowed; aggregate sentence quashed; respondent resentenced, eligible for parole set.
Legal Topics
Crown Appeals Against Sentence, Manifestly Inadequate Sentences, Domestic Violence, Aggregate Sentencing, Discount for Assistance, Special Circumstances, Totality Principle
Criminal Law Crown Appeals Against Sentence Manifestly Inadequate Sentences Domestic Violence Aggregate Sentencing Discount for Assistance Special Circumstances Totality Principle

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 5 Authorities cited 28 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Appellant Crown

JD

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appeal – Resentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the aggregate sentence imposed was manifestly inadequate
  2. 2 Whether the indicative sentences reflected objective seriousness
  3. 3 Whether special circumstances finding and double counting were errors

Ratio Decidendi

The aggregate sentence imposed on JD was manifestly inadequate as it failed to reflect the objective seriousness, aggravating features, high criminality, effect on victims over a prolonged period, limited prospects for rehabilitation, and relevant sentencing principles. The discounts for assistance and the non-parole period were excessive, and special circumstances were identified in a way that involved double counting. The appeal was allowed and the respondent resentenced to an increased aggregate term.

Court Disposition

Crown appeal allowed; aggregate sentence quashed; respondent resentenced, eligible for parole set.

Orders

  • The Crown appeal is allowed.
  • The aggregate sentence imposed on the respondent on 16 February 2018 by his Honour Judge Lakatos SC in respect of the offences against 'R' is quashed.