Ivory v R [2014] NSWCCA 181
The application for an extension of time was refused because the delay was not adequately explained, and neither alleged disparity between sentences nor the Crown's exercise of prosecutorial discretion warranted intervention; relevant principles preclude Court review of prosecutorial discretion post-conviction without proof of abuse of process.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 12 September 2014
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Application / Application for Extension of Time to Seek Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- Application refused
- Legal Topics
- ['application for Extension of Time' 'leave to Appeal Against Sentence' 'parity Principle' 'prosecutorial Discretion' 'sentencing' 'disparity Between Co Offenders']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Application / Application for Extension of Time to Seek Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the delay in bringing an application for leave to appeal against sentence was adequately explained' "Whether unjustifiable disparity between the applicant's sentence and sentences imposed on co-offenders warrants intervention" 'Whether the Court can review the exercise of prosecutorial discretion in charging offences for parity purposes']
Ratio Decidendi
The application for an extension of time was refused because the delay was not adequately explained, and neither alleged disparity between sentences nor the Crown's exercise of prosecutorial discretion warranted intervention; relevant principles preclude Court review of prosecutorial discretion post-conviction without proof of abuse of process.
Court Disposition
Application refused
Orders
- ['The application for an extension of time is refused.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment