Karel EEDENS v R [2009] NSWCCA 254

Karel EEDENS v R [2009] NSWCCA 254

The sentencing judge erred by failing to make a specific assessment of the objective seriousness of the offence as required by authority, and by basing departure from the standard non-parole period primarily on subjective factors. The sentence was manifestly excessive when compared to relevant case law. The appeal is allowed and the applicant re-sentenced to an appropriate term reflecting the correct principles of sentencing for offences under s 66A, considering Form 1 offences and allowing a 25% discount for the guilty plea.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 October 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Re Sentencing
Outcome
Appeal allowed; re-sentenced
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'sexual Offences Against Children' 'objective Seriousness of Offence' 'form 1 Procedures' 'standard Non Parole Period']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'sexual Offences Against Children' 'objective Seriousness of Offence' 'form 1 Procedures' 'standard Non Parole Period']

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 Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Re Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to assess the level of objective criminality in the offence under s 66A of the Crimes Act 1900' 'Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred by failing to make a specific assessment of the objective seriousness of the offence as required by authority, and by basing departure from the standard non-parole period primarily on subjective factors. The sentence was manifestly excessive when compared to relevant case law. The appeal is allowed and the applicant re-sentenced to an appropriate term reflecting the correct principles of sentencing for offences under s 66A, considering Form 1 offences and allowing a 25% discount for the guilty plea.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; re-sentenced

Orders

  • ['Application for leave to appeal granted and appeal allowed.' 'Sentence imposed in the District Court is quashed.' 'In lieu, the applicant is sentenced to a term of imprisonment comprising a non-parole period of 6 years and 2 months with a balance of term of 2 years 1 month.' 'Sentence to date from 14 May 2007.'...