R v Smith [2005] NSWCCA 339

R v Smith [2005] NSWCCA 339

The sentence for supply of prohibited drug was manifestly excessive and outside the legitimate discretion; the sentences for the other offences failed to properly reflect concurrency and totality considerations. The Court quashed all sentences and re-sentenced: supply prohibited drug, fixed term of 3 months; maliciously inflict grievous bodily harm, non-parole period of 3 years with a balance of 1.5 years; enter dwelling house with intent to commit larceny, non-parole period of 1 year with a balance of 2 years.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
28 September 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
leave to appeal granted; appeals allowed; sentences quashed and re-sentenced
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'drug Offences' 'grievous Bodily Harm' 'enter Dwelling With Intent' 'totality Principle' 'concurrency and Accumulation of Sentences']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'drug Offences' 'grievous Bodily Harm' 'enter Dwelling With Intent' 'totality Principle' 'concurrency and Accumulation of Sentences']

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence for supply of prohibited drug was manifestly excessive' 'Whether the sentencing Judge failed to properly consider cumulation, concurrency and totality with respect to sentences imposed' 'Whether the overall sentence appropriately reflected total criminality' 'Whether the Court should intervene when error is shown in individual sentences but overall sentence is appropriate']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence for supply of prohibited drug was manifestly excessive and outside the legitimate discretion; the sentences for the other offences failed to properly reflect concurrency and totality considerations. The Court quashed all sentences and re-sentenced: supply prohibited drug, fixed term of 3 months; maliciously inflict grievous bodily harm, non-parole period of 3 years with a balance of 1.5 years; enter dwelling house with intent to commit larceny, non-parole period of 1 year with a balance of 2 years.

Court Disposition

leave to appeal granted; appeals allowed; sentences quashed and re-sentenced

Orders

  • ['Grant applicant leave to appeal' "Allow applicant's appeal" 'Allow Crown appeal' 'Quash sentences imposed by Judge Latham on 21 October 2004' 'Sentence for supply of prohibited drug: imprisonment for a fixed term of 3 months from 27 August 2003' 'Sentence for maliciously inflict grievous bodily harm: non-parole...