R v Ryan [2000] NSWCCA 98

R v Ryan [2000] NSWCCA 98

The appeal failed because the sentencing Judge was entitled to consider the nature of the weapons used, including hand guns, when assessing the objective gravity of offences charged under s 97(1) of the Crimes Act, while remaining bound by the s 97(1) maximum penalty. The sentencing Judge had considered the guilty pleas, contrition, Fernando principles and other subjective circumstances, but the offences were objectively serious, numerous, committed while the applicant was on parole and bail, and involved a significant criminal history. The sentences were not manifestly excessive and were described as fairly lenient.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 March 2000
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted - appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['armed Robbery' 'robbery Whilst Armed With an Offensive Weapon' 'de Simoni Principle' 'manifest Excess' 'offences Taken Into Account' 'aboriginal Offender Sentencing Considerations']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['armed Robbery' 'robbery Whilst Armed With an Offensive Weapon' 'de Simoni Principle' 'manifest Excess' 'offences Taken Into Account' 'aboriginal Offender Sentencing Considerations']

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 Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing Judge infringed the principle in De Simoni v The Queen by taking into account that the applicant used a hand gun, where the offences were charged under s 97(1) of the Crimes Act rather than s 97(2).' 'Whether the sentences of penal servitude for ten years with minimum terms of six years were manifestly excessive.' "Whether the sentencing Judge gave sufficient weight to the applicant's pleas of guilty, contrition, subjective circumstances and the principles in R v. Fernando." 'Whether substantial weight could be given to serious offences included on a form under s 21 of the Criminal Procedure Act rather than in the indictment.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the sentencing Judge was entitled to consider the nature of the weapons used, including hand guns, when assessing the objective gravity of offences charged under s 97(1) of the Crimes Act, while remaining bound by the s 97(1) maximum penalty. The sentencing Judge had considered the guilty pleas, contrition, Fernando principles and other subjective circumstances, but the offences were objectively serious, numerous, committed while the applicant was on parole and bail, and involved a significant criminal history. The sentences were not manifestly excessive and were described as fairly lenient.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted - appeal dismissed

Orders

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