Locke v R [2010] NSWCCA 296

Locke v R [2010] NSWCCA 296

The appeal was allowed because material sentencing error was established. The applicant's youth was relevant not only to the non-parole periods but also to the overall terms of the sentences; the assessment of the 14 August 2008 commercial supply offence as at least at the high end of the mid-range was not open given the applicant's lesser role; and the sentencing judge's reasons did not adequately identify the s 21A factors and may have impermissibly taken into account s 21A(2)(m). Those errors warranted less severe sentences under s 6(3) Criminal Appeal Act 1912, with the applicant's reasonable prospects of rehabilitation, youth, lack of significant prior convictions, good conduct on...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 December 2010
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence for ongoing supply confirmed; remaining District Court sentences quashed and substituted with lesser sentences. The total term is 9 years with a non-parole component of 5 years 6 months.
Legal Topics
['commercial Supply of Mdma' 'ongoing Supply of Prohibited Drug' 'severity Appeal' 'youth and Immaturity' 'prospects of Rehabilitation' 'objective Seriousness' 'aggravating and Mitigating Factors' 'totality Principle']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['commercial Supply of Mdma' 'ongoing Supply of Prohibited Drug' 'severity Appeal' 'youth and Immaturity' 'prospects of Rehabilitation' 'objective Seriousness' 'aggravating and Mitigating Factors' '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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Severity of Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred by treating the applicant's criminal record as irrelevant to determining sentence." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in finding that the only hope of rehabilitation was that increasing age could bring greater maturity.' "Whether the sentencing judge failed to give proper weight to the applicant's youth and immaturity in setting the individual and overall sentences." 'Whether the fact that drugs were supplied to undercover police operatives mitigated the offences because no injury, emotional harm, loss or damage was caused.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the commercial supply offence of 14 August 2008 as at least at the high end of the mid-range of objective seriousness.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the indictable quantity supply offence as at least at the high end of the mid-range of objective seriousness.' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to identify the s 21A(2) and s 21A(3) factors taken into account.' 'Whether the totality of the accumulated sentences was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal was allowed because material sentencing error was established. The applicant's youth was relevant not only to the non-parole periods but also to the overall terms of the sentences; the assessment of the 14 August 2008 commercial supply offence as at least at the high end of the mid-range was not open given the applicant's lesser role; and the sentencing judge's reasons did not adequately identify the s 21A factors and may have impermissibly taken into account s 21A(2)(m). Those errors warranted less severe sentences under s 6(3) Criminal Appeal Act 1912, with the applicant's reasonable prospects of rehabilitation, youth, lack of significant prior convictions, good conduct on...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence for ongoing supply confirmed; remaining District Court sentences quashed and substituted with lesser sentences. The total term is 9 years with a non-parole component of 5 years 6 months.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal allowed.' 'The sentence for the offence of ongoing supply (from 3 to 25 April 2008) of imprisonment for 3 years to date from 1 October 2008 and expire on 30 September 2011 is confirmed.' 'The remaining sentences imposed in the District Court are quashed and in lieu, the following...