Regina v John Gordon Porteous [2005] NSWCCA 115

Regina v John Gordon Porteous [2005] NSWCCA 115

The sentencing judge erred by allowing only a 15.5% combined discount for the Applicant's early guilty plea and genuine remorse without adequate justification; a reduction of two years and three months from the eight-year starting point was warranted and still left an appropriate head sentence for the objectively serious s.112(2) offence. However, the offence lay above the mid-range of objective seriousness and a non-parole period of three years and nine months was the minimum term that ought be served, so the non-parole period was not reduced.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 April 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted for the s.112(2) sentence, refused for the s.154A sentence; appeal allowed in part; s.112(2) sentence quashed and offender resentenced.
Legal Topics
['break, Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence in Circumstances of Aggravation' 'taking and Driving a Conveyance Without Consent' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'discount for Early Guilty Plea' 'remorse' 'objective Seriousness' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['break, Enter and Commit Serious Indictable Offence in Circumstances of Aggravation' 'taking and Driving a Conveyance Without Consent' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'discount for Early Guilty Plea' 'remorse' 'objective Seriousness' 'special Circumstances']

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge failed to allow a sufficient discount for the Applicant's early plea of guilty and remorse." 'Whether the sentence for the offence under s.112(2) Crimes Act 1900 was excessive and a less severe sentence was warranted at law.' 'How the standard non-parole period and objective seriousness of the offence should be considered for a post-1 February 2003 offence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred by allowing only a 15.5% combined discount for the Applicant's early guilty plea and genuine remorse without adequate justification; a reduction of two years and three months from the eight-year starting point was warranted and still left an appropriate head sentence for the objectively serious s.112(2) offence. However, the offence lay above the mid-range of objective seriousness and a non-parole period of three years and nine months was the minimum term that ought be served, so the non-parole period was not reduced.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted for the s.112(2) sentence, refused for the s.154A sentence; appeal allowed in part; s.112(2) sentence quashed and offender resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted as to the sentence for the offence under s.112(2) Crimes Act 1900.' 'Leave to appeal refused as to the sentence for the offence under s.154A Crimes Act 1900.' 'Appeal allowed with respect to the offence under s.112(2) and the sentence quashed.' 'Sentence for the s.112(2) offence to...