KAB v R [2015] NSWCCA 55

KAB v R [2015] NSWCCA 55

The application for extension of time in which to appeal was refused because there was inordinate and unexplained delay, no exceptional circumstances, and the proposed appeal lacked merit; the asserted sentencing errors either did not materially affect the sentences or were within the sentencing judge's discretion.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 April 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Extension of Time to Appeal; Appeal Out of Time Refused
Outcome
Application refused
Legal Topics
['sentence Appeal' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'good Character' 'childhood Sexual Abuse' 'procedural Fairness' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law'] ['sentence Appeal' 'extension of Time to Appeal' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'good Character' 'childhood Sexual Abuse' 'procedural Fairness' 'manifest Excess']

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 Extension of Time to Appeal; Appeal Out of Time Refused

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in applying a standard non-parole period to counts 1 and 6' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by not extending leniency for prior good character' "Whether failure to give weight to the applicant's own history of childhood sexual abuse was an error" 'Whether there was denial of procedural fairness regarding the finding of high risk of pregnancy in count 5' 'Whether the sentence for count 1 was manifestly excessive' 'Whether an extension of time to appeal should be granted']

Ratio Decidendi

The application for extension of time in which to appeal was refused because there was inordinate and unexplained delay, no exceptional circumstances, and the proposed appeal lacked merit; the asserted sentencing errors either did not materially affect the sentences or were within the sentencing judge's discretion.

Court Disposition

Application refused

Orders

  • ['The application for an extension of time in which to appeal is refused']