R v NASTALY [2000] NSWCCA 486

R v NASTALY [2000] NSWCCA 486

The sentence had to be quashed because the sentencing judge proceeded on the erroneous assumption that the Crown had appealed against the co-offender's sentence. On re-sentencing, parity with the co-offender warranted the lower sentence the sentencing judge would have imposed had he known the co-offender's sentence stood, and the applicant's rehabilitation did not justify any lesser sentence because it was substantially anticipated at first instance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 November 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed, sentence quashed, and applicant re-sentenced.
Legal Topics
['robbery in Company' 'parity in Sentencing' 'crown Appeal Misinformation' 'post Sentence Rehabilitation' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['robbery in Company' 'parity in Sentencing' 'crown Appeal Misinformation' 'post Sentence Rehabilitation' '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 Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred by sentencing the applicant on the mistaken assumption that the Crown had appealed against the co-offender's sentence." 'Whether parity with the co-offender required a lesser sentence.' "Whether evidence of the applicant's rehabilitation since sentence justified a shorter sentence or immediate release."]

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence had to be quashed because the sentencing judge proceeded on the erroneous assumption that the Crown had appealed against the co-offender's sentence. On re-sentencing, parity with the co-offender warranted the lower sentence the sentencing judge would have imposed had he known the co-offender's sentence stood, and the applicant's rehabilitation did not justify any lesser sentence because it was substantially anticipated at first instance.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted, appeal allowed, sentence quashed, and applicant re-sentenced.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal and allow the appeal.' 'Quash the sentence appealed from.' 'Impose in lieu a sentence of imprisonment of three years five months commencing on 16 February 2000 and expiring on 15 July 2003.' 'Fix a non-parole period of eleven months expiring on 15 January 2001.' 'Declare that the applicant is...