Milich v Regina [2008] NSWCCA 148

Milich v Regina [2008] NSWCCA 148

Although no specific error was shown in the sentencing judge's findings about the applicant's role, reliance on comparative ranges, treatment of prior good character, or expression of suspicion about reward, the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive because the favourable matters expressly found by the judge, including substantial admissions shortening the trial, onerous bail conditions, unblemished character, excellent rehabilitation prospects and low likelihood of reoffending, were not reflected in the sentence to the extent they merited, and the sentence appeared markedly higher than the preponderance of comparable cases.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 June 2008
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment After Conviction at Trial and Sentence in the District Court
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence in the District Court quashed; applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['attempt to Possess Imported Narcotic Goods' 'imported Cocaine' 'manifest Excess' 'comparative Sentencing' 'repeal of S 16 G of the Crimes Act 1914']
['criminal Law and Procedure' 'sentencing'] ['attempt to Possess Imported Narcotic Goods' 'imported Cocaine' 'manifest Excess' 'comparative Sentencing' 'repeal of S 16 G of the Crimes Act 1914']

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 Application for Leave to Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment After Conviction at Trial and Sentence in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence of imprisonment for 10 years with a non-parole period of 6 years for attempting to possess imported narcotic goods was manifestly excessive.' "Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the applicant's role and culpability in the importation exercise." "Whether the sentencing judge failed to give sufficient weight to the applicant's prior good character, admissions, onerous bail conditions, prospects of rehabilitation and low risk of reoffending." 'Whether the sentencing judge was required to sentence within the range discussed in R v Wong & anor (1999) 48 NSWLR 340.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although no specific error was shown in the sentencing judge's findings about the applicant's role, reliance on comparative ranges, treatment of prior good character, or expression of suspicion about reward, the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive because the favourable matters expressly found by the judge, including substantial admissions shortening the trial, onerous bail conditions, unblemished character, excellent rehabilitation prospects and low likelihood of reoffending, were not reflected in the sentence to the extent they merited, and the sentence appeared markedly higher than the preponderance of comparable cases.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence in the District Court quashed; applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal against sentence granted.' 'Appeal allowed.' 'Sentence imposed in the District Court quashed.' 'In lieu, the applicant sentenced to imprisonment for 8 years commencing on 14 October 2006 with a non-parole period of 4 years 9 months commencing on that date.' "The applicant's legal...