Magro v R [2020] NSWCCA 25

Magro v R [2020] NSWCCA 25

The sentencing judge erred in the assessment of the discount for the offered plea of guilty to manslaughter; a 20% discount (rather than 10%) was appropriate given the early offer's partial utilitarian value, thus the aggregate sentence is reduced to 13 years and 4 months with a non-parole period of 10 years.

Parties
Appellant: Joshua Magro; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 February 2020
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; re-sentenced
Legal Topics
Manslaughter, Appeal Against Sentence, Use of Firearm Near Public Place, Excessive Self Defence, Utilitarian Discount, Manifest Excess, Sentencing Discretion
Criminal Law Manslaughter Appeal Against Sentence Use of Firearm Near Public Place Excessive Self Defence Utilitarian Discount Manifest Excess Sentencing Discretion

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 30 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Joshua Magro

Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in fact finding on excessive self-defence
  2. 2 Whether the discount for early plea was appropriately assessed
  3. 3 Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred in the assessment of the discount for the offered plea of guilty to manslaughter; a 20% discount (rather than 10%) was appropriate given the early offer's partial utilitarian value, thus the aggregate sentence is reduced to 13 years and 4 months with a non-parole period of 10 years.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; re-sentenced

Orders

  • Grant the applicant leave to appeal against sentence.
  • Appeal allowed.