R v Cousins & Anor [2002] NSWCCA 340

R v Cousins & Anor [2002] NSWCCA 340

The sentencing judge did err by putting aside the utilitarian value of the guilty pleas, but the 20 per cent discounts actually given were as much as the applicants could properly have expected. The applicants showed no contrition apart from the pleas, their objective criminality was significant, imprisonment was the only proper sentencing alternative, and the sentences were within the range properly available. Because no other sentence was warranted in law and should have been passed, the appeals were dismissed except for the required parole release order for Patricia Grenda Cousins.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 August 2002
Procedural Posture
Sentence Appeal / Applications for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted in each case; appeals dismissed in each case except for an order that Patricia Grenda Cousins be released from custody on 24 July 2003.
Legal Topics
['possession of Precursor Intended for Manufacture of Prohibited Drug' 'discount for Plea of Guilty' 'utilitarian Value of Plea' 'manifest Excess' 'parole Release Order']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Procedure'] ['possession of Precursor Intended for Manufacture of Prohibited Drug' 'discount for Plea of Guilty' 'utilitarian Value of Plea' 'manifest Excess' 'parole Release Order']

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

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge failed to give a discount for the applicants' early pleas of guilty." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by putting aside the utilitarian value of the pleas of guilty after Cameron v The Queen.' 'Whether discounts greater than 20 per cent, or findings of contrition, were required.' 'Whether the sentences of imprisonment were manifestly excessive or imprisonment was not open.' 'Whether another sentence was warranted in law under s 6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912.' 'Whether a parole release order should have been made for Patricia Grenda Cousins.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did err by putting aside the utilitarian value of the guilty pleas, but the 20 per cent discounts actually given were as much as the applicants could properly have expected. The applicants showed no contrition apart from the pleas, their objective criminality was significant, imprisonment was the only proper sentencing alternative, and the sentences were within the range properly available. Because no other sentence was warranted in law and should have been passed, the appeals were dismissed except for the required parole release order for Patricia Grenda Cousins.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted in each case; appeals dismissed in each case except for an order that Patricia Grenda Cousins be released from custody on 24 July 2003.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal in each case.' 'Appeal dismissed in each case save only for the following order.' 'Order that the applicant Patricia Grenda Cousins be released from custody on 24 July 2003.']