Jones v R [2015] NSWCCA 180
The sentencing judge did not err by declining to find special circumstances, as the relevant factors now raised on appeal were not put before the judge, and the applicant’s lengthy criminal history and failures at rehabilitation justified the approach. No error was disclosed in respect of parity or institutionalisation, and the arguments regarding the statutory percentage were not advanced below.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 07 July 2015
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
- Legal Topics
- ['sentencing' 'appeals' 'special Circumstances' 'parity Principle' 'institutionalisation' 'rehabilitation']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in failing to find special circumstances under s.44(2) Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999' 'Whether there was a justifiable sense of grievance due to disparity between the applicant’s sentence and his co-offender’s sentence']
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge did not err by declining to find special circumstances, as the relevant factors now raised on appeal were not put before the judge, and the applicant’s lengthy criminal history and failures at rehabilitation justified the approach. No error was disclosed in respect of parity or institutionalisation, and the arguments regarding the statutory percentage were not advanced below.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
Orders
- ['Leave to appeal be granted' 'Appeal be dismissed']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment