COLLINS, Marcus Shane v R [2010] NSWCCA 13

COLLINS, Marcus Shane v R [2010] NSWCCA 13

The sentencing judge erred because the related offences transferred under s 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 were subject to s 168(3), which confined the District Court to the same functions, restrictions and procedures as the Local Court. The sentences for the malicious damage and common assault offences were manifestly excessive when measured against the nature of the offences and the applicable Local Court limits. The sentence of 3 years for intimidation was also manifestly excessive in light of the circumstances of the offending, even accepting that the offence was above the middle range of seriousness. Lesser sentences were warranted in law.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 February 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal allowed; sentences quashed; applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['common Assault' 'malicious Damage to Property' 'intimidation' 'manifest Excess' 'summary Disposal in the Local Court' 'related Offences Transferred Under S 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986' 'objective Seriousness' 'totality']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Procedure'] ['common Assault' 'malicious Damage to Property' 'intimidation' 'manifest Excess' 'summary Disposal in the Local Court' 'related Offences Transferred Under S 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986' 'objective Seriousness' 'totality']

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 Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge failed to have proper regard to the fact that all of the charges could have been dealt with in the Local Court.' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to assess properly, or at all, the objective seriousness of the offences that had been the subject of pleas of guilty in the Local Court.' 'Whether the sentences imposed were manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred because the related offences transferred under s 166 of the Criminal Procedure Act 1986 were subject to s 168(3), which confined the District Court to the same functions, restrictions and procedures as the Local Court. The sentences for the malicious damage and common assault offences were manifestly excessive when measured against the nature of the offences and the applicable Local Court limits. The sentence of 3 years for intimidation was also manifestly excessive in light of the circumstances of the offending, even accepting that the offence was above the middle range of seriousness. Lesser sentences were warranted in law.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal allowed; sentences quashed; applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal against sentence.' 'Allow the appeal.' 'Quash the sentences imposed upon the applicant by Nield DCJ on 12 September 2008.' 'For common assault committed on 15 May 2007, sentence the applicant to imprisonment for 6 months from 23 June 2007 to 22 December 2007.' 'For common assault committed on...