PENFOLD v R; WARD v R [2010] NSWCCA 61

PENFOLD v R; WARD v R [2010] NSWCCA 61

The sentencing judge made no error in applying sentencing principles, gave appropriate weight to both aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and properly exercised discretion in treating each co-offender according to their role and circumstances. There was no miscarriage of discretion, nor did any difference between co-offenders' non-parole periods amount to a justifiable sense of grievance.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Sentence and Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted in each appeal; appeal dismissed in each case.
Legal Topics
['sentence' 'robbery Whilst Armed' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'sentencing Principles' 'co Offenders' 'aggravating and Mitigating Factors' 'application for Leave to Appeal' 'culpability']
['criminal Law'] ['sentence' 'robbery Whilst Armed' 'joint Criminal Enterprise' 'sentencing Principles' 'co Offenders' 'aggravating and Mitigating Factors' 'application for Leave to Appeal' 'culpability']

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 / Leave to Appeal Against Sentence and Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences imposed on Penfold and Ward were manifestly excessive' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in the application of sentencing principles to co-offenders with different roles' 'Whether aggravating and mitigating factors were correctly assessed' 'Whether a justifiable sense of grievance arose from differences in non-parole periods for co-offenders']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge made no error in applying sentencing principles, gave appropriate weight to both aggravating and mitigating circumstances, and properly exercised discretion in treating each co-offender according to their role and circumstances. There was no miscarriage of discretion, nor did any difference between co-offenders' non-parole periods amount to a justifiable sense of grievance.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted in each appeal; appeal dismissed in each case.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against sentence granted to Penfold and Ward.' 'Appeals dismissed for both Penfold and Ward.']