R. v. HEARD [2000] NSWCCA 107

R. v. HEARD [2000] NSWCCA 107

The sentence imposed on the applicant was manifestly excessive, particularly when compared with sentences imposed on co-offenders of greater criminality, breaching the parity principle; a lesser sentence was appropriate.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Applicant: John Edward Heard
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 April 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence quashed. New sentence imposed.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Parity, Drug Offences
Criminal Law Sentencing Parity Drug Offences

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 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

John Edward Heard

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed on the applicant was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the principle of parity required intervention in the sentence imposed

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence imposed on the applicant was manifestly excessive, particularly when compared with sentences imposed on co-offenders of greater criminality, breaching the parity principle; a lesser sentence was appropriate.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence quashed. New sentence imposed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted.
  • Appeal allowed; sentence quashed.