R v Stewart [2005] NSWCCA 290

R v Stewart [2005] NSWCCA 290

The applicant should not be punished twice for overlapping criminal conduct; the sentence for break, enter and steal should have included a credit for the three months served for goods in custody, as the goods in custody charge arose directly from the same criminal conduct.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 August 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence quashed and substituted
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'break, Enter and Steal' 'double Punishment' 'credit for Prior Imprisonment' 'overlapping Criminal Conduct']

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 / Appeal Against Sentence

  1. 1 ['Whether the applicant was punished twice for overlapping criminal conduct' 'Whether credit should be given for prior imprisonment for the criminal conduct' 'Whether sentencing was in accordance with applicable legal principles']

Ratio Decidendi

The applicant should not be punished twice for overlapping criminal conduct; the sentence for break, enter and steal should have included a credit for the three months served for goods in custody, as the goods in custody charge arose directly from the same criminal conduct.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence quashed and substituted

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal be granted' 'Appeal be allowed' 'Original sentences for Counts 1 and 2 quashed' 'Count 1: imprisonment for a fixed term of 12 months commencing 27 February 2004 and expiring 26 February 2005' 'Count 2: imprisonment for a non-parole period of 12 months commencing 27 August 2004 and expiring 26...