Stanton v R [2017] NSWCCA 250

Stanton v R [2017] NSWCCA 250

No appellable error was established. The 15% utilitarian discount was open given the pleas were entered about a year after committal and effectively on the eve of trial. The sentencing Judge was entitled, on the limited and largely uncorroborated evidence, not to find low risk of reoffending, genuine remorse, or meaningful mitigating good character. The indicative sentences reflected the very high objective gravity of repeated historic sexual offences committed by a religious brother and teacher against three young boys in breach of trust, and did not show error in the aggregate sentence. The sentencing Judge had regard to historical sentencing practices, special circumstances, the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 October 2017
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Aggregate Sentence Imposed in the Parramatta District Court
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['historic Child Sexual Abuse' 'indecent Assault' 'buggery' 'attempted Buggery' 'aggregate Sentence' 'indicative Sentences' 'totality Principle' 'utilitarian Discount for Guilty Pleas' 'prospects of Reoffending' 'remorse' 'good Character' 'historic Sentencing Practices' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['historic Child Sexual Abuse' 'indecent Assault' 'buggery' 'attempted Buggery' 'aggregate Sentence' 'indicative Sentences' 'totality Principle' 'utilitarian Discount for Guilty Pleas' 'prospects of Reoffending' 'remorse' 'good Character' 'historic Sentencing Practices' 'manifest Excess']

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 Parramatta District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing Judge erred in determining the utilitarian discount for the pleas of guilty.' "Whether the sentencing Judge erred in assessing the Applicant's prospects of reoffending." 'Whether the sentencing Judge erred in failing to find that the Applicant was remorseful.' 'Whether the sentencing Judge erred in failing to give mitigating effect to evidence of good character.' 'Whether the sentencing Judge erred in determining the aggregate sentence, including by the indicative sentences and notional accumulation.' 'Whether the aggregate sentence was manifestly excessive, including having regard to historical sentencing practices, totality and the non-parole period.']

Ratio Decidendi

No appellable error was established. The 15% utilitarian discount was open given the pleas were entered about a year after committal and effectively on the eve of trial. The sentencing Judge was entitled, on the limited and largely uncorroborated evidence, not to find low risk of reoffending, genuine remorse, or meaningful mitigating good character. The indicative sentences reflected the very high objective gravity of repeated historic sexual offences committed by a religious brother and teacher against three young boys in breach of trust, and did not show error in the aggregate sentence. The sentencing Judge had regard to historical sentencing practices, special circumstances, the...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against sentence granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']