R v Wardini [2003] NSWCCA 249

R v Wardini [2003] NSWCCA 249

The Crown appeal was dismissed because error by the sentencing judge was not shown; in any event, the strong subjective circumstances, including pressure arising from debts, lack of prior convictions, guilty plea, real remorse, family circumstances, absence of drug trafficking history, and especially the inordinate and inexcusable delay between the November 2000 conduct and March 2003 charge, meant this was not a proper case to exercise the Court's discretion to intervene on a Crown appeal.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 2003
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appeal Pursuant to S 5 D of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 From Sentence Imposed in the District Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['objective Seriousness of Offence' 'crown Sentence Appeal' 'delay in Charging Accused' 'large Commercial Quantity of Methylamphetamine' 'periodic Detention']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['objective Seriousness of Offence' 'crown Sentence Appeal' 'delay in Charging Accused' 'large Commercial Quantity of Methylamphetamine' 'periodic Detention']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appeal Pursuant to S 5 D of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 From Sentence Imposed in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentence failed to reflect the objective seriousness of the respondent's offence" 'Whether the sentencing judge gave disproportionate weight to subjective features' 'Whether delay in charging the respondent and other circumstances justified avoiding full-time custody' 'Whether, even if appellable error were shown, the Court should exercise its residual discretion to intervene on a Crown appeal']

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown appeal was dismissed because error by the sentencing judge was not shown; in any event, the strong subjective circumstances, including pressure arising from debts, lack of prior convictions, guilty plea, real remorse, family circumstances, absence of drug trafficking history, and especially the inordinate and inexcusable delay between the November 2000 conduct and March 2003 charge, meant this was not a proper case to exercise the Court's discretion to intervene on a Crown appeal.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is dismissed.']