Williams v R [2016] NSWCCA 68

Williams v R [2016] NSWCCA 68

The sentencing judge did not err in assessment of objective seriousness, application of the totality principle, or consideration of aggravating factors. No House v R error or manifest excess was shown and differences with the co-offender's sentence were justified by distinctions in criminality. The appeal was dismissed.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
04 May 2016
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Final Orders
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'supply Commercial Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'aggregate Sentence' 'assessment of Objective Seriousness' 'principle of Totality' 'parity' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence']

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 / Leave to Appeal and Final Orders

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessment of objective seriousness of offences' 'Whether the principle of totality was properly applied' 'Whether the judge gave undue weight to factors including protection of the community and custodial conduct' 'Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive' 'Whether there was a justifiable sense of grievance in parity toward a co-offender']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err in assessment of objective seriousness, application of the totality principle, or consideration of aggravating factors. No House v R error or manifest excess was shown and differences with the co-offender's sentence were justified by distinctions in criminality. The appeal was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Dismiss the appeal.']