Watkins v R [2018] NSWCCA 24

Watkins v R [2018] NSWCCA 24

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed ground had no merit. In the context of agreed facts, guilty pleas, detailed Crown written submissions, brief defence submissions focused on subjective matters, and an exchange in which defence counsel accepted the appropriateness of the aggregate sentence, the sentencing judge's succinct ex tempore remarks sufficiently disclosed consideration of the seriousness of the offending. The applicant could not successfully complain on appeal that the judge failed to assess objective seriousness when that issue was not advanced below in the way later put on appeal, and no lesser sentence was warranted in any event.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 March 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Aggregate Sentence Imposed in the District Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Leave to appeal refused.
Legal Topics
['supply Prohibited Drug' 'ongoing Supply Prohibited Drug' 'possession of Unauthorised Firearm' 'dealing With Proceeds of Crime' 'objective Seriousness' 'aggregate Sentence' 'form 1 Matters' 'special Circumstances']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['supply Prohibited Drug' 'ongoing Supply Prohibited Drug' 'possession of Unauthorised Firearm' 'dealing With Proceeds of Crime' 'objective Seriousness' 'aggregate Sentence' 'form 1 Matters' 'special Circumstances']

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 Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Aggregate Sentence Imposed in the District Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to properly assess the objective seriousness of the offences.' 'Whether leave to appeal against sentence should be granted.']

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was refused because the proposed ground had no merit. In the context of agreed facts, guilty pleas, detailed Crown written submissions, brief defence submissions focused on subjective matters, and an exchange in which defence counsel accepted the appropriateness of the aggregate sentence, the sentencing judge's succinct ex tempore remarks sufficiently disclosed consideration of the seriousness of the offending. The applicant could not successfully complain on appeal that the judge failed to assess objective seriousness when that issue was not advanced below in the way later put on appeal, and no lesser sentence was warranted in any event.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal refused.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal refused.']