McDowall v R [2019] NSWCCA 29

McDowall v R [2019] NSWCCA 29

The sentencing judge did not err. The description of the aggravated taking motor vehicle with assault offence, including its physical and verbal abuse and its terrifying effect on the victims, sufficiently identified the facts, matters and circumstances bearing on objective seriousness. The aggregate sentence was not manifestly excessive because the offending was very serious, involved substantial risks to police and the community, and the aggregate sentence already reflected substantial concurrency and a degree of mercy. The disparity with the co-offender was justified by differences in charges and culpability, including the applicant being charged with the aggravated motor vehicle...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 February 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal From Sentence Imposed in the Sydney District Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['objective Seriousness' 'manifest Excess' 'parity and Disparity Between Co Offenders' 'aggregate Sentence' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'totality Principle']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['objective Seriousness' 'manifest Excess' 'parity and Disparity Between Co Offenders' 'aggregate Sentence' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'totality Principle']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal From Sentence Imposed in the Sydney District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to make a finding of objective seriousness for aggravated taking of a motor vehicle with assault contrary to s 154C of the Crimes Act 1900 (NSW).' "Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive, including by reason of accumulation and the applicant's age and background." "Whether disparity between the applicant's sentence and the co-offender's sentence gave rise to a justifiable sense of grievance."]

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err. The description of the aggravated taking motor vehicle with assault offence, including its physical and verbal abuse and its terrifying effect on the victims, sufficiently identified the facts, matters and circumstances bearing on objective seriousness. The aggregate sentence was not manifestly excessive because the offending was very serious, involved substantial risks to police and the community, and the aggregate sentence already reflected substantial concurrency and a degree of mercy. The disparity with the co-offender was justified by differences in charges and culpability, including the applicant being charged with the aggravated motor vehicle...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']