HAINES v R [2008] NSWCCA 12

HAINES v R [2008] NSWCCA 12

The sentencing judge erred by overlooking the need to adjust the non-parole period to reflect the statutory ratio under s 44(2) of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 in light of sentence accumulation. The non-parole period should be varied accordingly.

Parties
Applicant: Lloyd HAINES; Respondent: REGINA
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 February 2008
Procedural Posture
Sentence Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Varied in part; appeal allowed in respect of non-parole period for charge 2; otherwise dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Drug Court Referral, Special Circumstances, Non Parole Period, Accumulation of Sentences, Totality Principle
Criminal Law Sentencing Drug Court Referral Special Circumstances Non Parole Period Accumulation of Sentences Totality Principle

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 2 Authorities cited 5 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Lloyd HAINES

Applicant

REGINA

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Sentence Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to adjust the non-parole period to reflect special circumstances and accumulation of sentences
  2. 2 Whether the overall sentence was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred by overlooking the need to adjust the non-parole period to reflect the statutory ratio under s 44(2) of the Crimes (Administration of Sentences) Act 1999 in light of sentence accumulation. The non-parole period should be varied accordingly.

Court Disposition

Varied in part; appeal allowed in respect of non-parole period for charge 2; otherwise dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal is granted.
  • The appeal in respect of the sentence imposed on charge 1 is dismissed.