R v Khoury [2018] NSWCCA 223

R v Khoury [2018] NSWCCA 223

Although the sentences imposed were manifestly inadequate, particularly given the seriousness of the domestic violence offending and the potentially catastrophic consequences of setting fire to the victim's door, the Crown had not opposed the Griffiths remand, the ICO assessment, or the possibility of an ICO during the sentence proceedings, and had not submitted that full-time imprisonment was required. The Crown was bound by the way it conducted the sentence proceedings and failed to discharge its onus of persuading the Court not to exercise the residual discretion. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
15 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence for Manifest Inadequacy / Appeal to the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal From Sentences Imposed in the District Court of NSW
Outcome
Crown appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'manifest Inadequacy' 'intensive Correction Order' 'suspended Sentence' 'residual Discretion' 'general and Specific Deterrence' 'rehabilitation' 'damage Property by Fire Intending to Injure Persons' 'aggravated Attempted Break and Enter With Intent to Intimidate']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'domestic Violence'] ['crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'manifest Inadequacy' 'intensive Correction Order' 'suspended Sentence' 'residual Discretion' 'general and Specific Deterrence' 'rehabilitation' 'damage Property by Fire Intending to Injure Persons' 'aggravated Attempted Break and Enter With Intent to Intimidate']

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

Crown Appeal Against Sentence for Manifest Inadequacy / Appeal to the NSW Court of Criminal Appeal From Sentences Imposed in the District Court of NSW

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences imposed for Count 1 and Count 2 were manifestly inadequate.' 'Whether the sentencing judge gave proper regard to general and specific deterrence.' "Whether undue weight was given to the respondent's prospects of rehabilitation." 'Whether the sentencing judge properly considered totality and accumulation.' 'Whether the Court should exercise its residual discretion not to interfere despite finding manifest inadequacy.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sentences imposed were manifestly inadequate, particularly given the seriousness of the domestic violence offending and the potentially catastrophic consequences of setting fire to the victim's door, the Crown had not opposed the Griffiths remand, the ICO assessment, or the possibility of an ICO during the sentence proceedings, and had not submitted that full-time imprisonment was required. The Crown was bound by the way it conducted the sentence proceedings and failed to discharge its onus of persuading the Court not to exercise the residual discretion. The appeal was therefore dismissed.

Court Disposition

Crown appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Crown appeal dismissed.']