Baden v R [2020] NSWCCA 23
The sentencing judge properly took into account both the utilitarian and subjective value of the guilty pleas concerning the Commonwealth offences, correctly assessed the objective seriousness in light of the facts and the gravity of the offending, and accurately evaluated the applicant's poor prospects of...
Source-derived case information.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 21 February 2020
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Sentence
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal refused
- Legal Topics
- ['sentencing' 'utilitarian Value of Guilty Plea' 'objective Seriousness' 'child Sex Offences' 'rehabilitation Prospects']
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether sentencing judge erred in taking into account utilitarian value of guilty pleas for Commonwealth offences' 'Whether error was made in assessment of objective seriousness of offences' "Whether error in assessment of applicant's subjective characteristics and prospects of rehabilitation" 'Whether sentences imposed were manifestly excessive or plainly unjust']
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge properly took into account both the utilitarian and subjective value of the guilty pleas concerning the Commonwealth offences, correctly assessed the objective seriousness in light of the facts and the gravity of the offending, and accurately evaluated the applicant's poor prospects of rehabilitation and lack of remorse. No relevant error was demonstrated in any ground of appeal.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal refused
Orders
- ['Leave to appeal is refused']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment