REGINA v. AVANESS [2002] NSWCCA 230

REGINA v. AVANESS [2002] NSWCCA 230

The sentencing judge made no error in relying on the unchallenged facts as to the applicant's role in the second robbery, and even on the applicant's evidence there was little mitigation because he joined with others in seeking random victims to assault and rob. The offences were very serious pack robberies of random young victims involving violence, deterrence and denunciation were important, the guilty plea and subjective circumstances were adequately reflected, and no House error or basis under s.6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 was shown for imposing a different sentence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
17 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['robbery in Company' 'sentence Appeal' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'rehabilitation Prospects' 'full Time Custody' 'guideline Judgment']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['robbery in Company' 'sentence Appeal' 'guilty Plea Discount' 'rehabilitation Prospects' 'full Time Custody' 'guideline Judgment']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

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

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred in finding the applicant's role in the second robbery on the police facts tendered without objection rather than accepting the applicant's evidence of lesser participation." "Whether the sentencing judge failed to give sufficient weight to the applicant's rehabilitation prospects and subjective circumstances." "Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to give a sufficient discount for the applicant's early guilty plea." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to consider a community service order or periodic detention instead of full-time custody.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge made no error in relying on the unchallenged facts as to the applicant's role in the second robbery, and even on the applicant's evidence there was little mitigation because he joined with others in seeking random victims to assault and rob. The offences were very serious pack robberies of random young victims involving violence, deterrence and denunciation were important, the guilty plea and subjective circumstances were adequately reflected, and no House error or basis under s.6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 was shown for imposing a different sentence.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

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