Griffiths v R [2021] NSWCCA 226

Griffiths v R [2021] NSWCCA 226

It was an error for the sentencing judge to compare the applicant's sentence and criminality to that of co-offender Mr Winner, given the fundamental differences in their offences and sentences. This resulted in the improper application of the parity principle and the taking into account of an irrelevant consideration, warranting allowance of the appeal and re-sentencing of the applicant.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
24 September 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Judgment and Resentencing
Outcome
Appeal allowed; leave to appeal granted; original sentences quashed; applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'drug Offences' 'parity Principle' 'sentencing Errors' 'manifest Excess in Sentencing' 'aggregate Sentencing']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'drug Offences' 'parity Principle' 'sentencing Errors' 'manifest Excess in Sentencing' 'aggregate Sentencing']

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 Judgment and Resentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by taking into account the sentence imposed on a co-offender (Mr Winner)' 'Whether the individual sentences and overall sentence were manifestly excessive']

Ratio Decidendi

It was an error for the sentencing judge to compare the applicant's sentence and criminality to that of co-offender Mr Winner, given the fundamental differences in their offences and sentences. This resulted in the improper application of the parity principle and the taking into account of an irrelevant consideration, warranting allowance of the appeal and re-sentencing of the applicant.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; leave to appeal granted; original sentences quashed; applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['The applicant is granted leave to appeal on ground 1;' 'The appeal is allowed;' 'The orders made by Ellis DCJ on 31 October 2018 are quashed;' 'In lieu thereof, the offender is sentenced as follows: (a) an aggregate sentence of 10 years and 8 months is imposed, to date from 21 December 2016, expiring on 20 August...