REGINA v SIMPSON [2001] NSWCCA 534

REGINA v SIMPSON [2001] NSWCCA 534

The sentencing judge did not err in declining to find special circumstances, because the subjective matters relied on by the Applicant were unremarkable and did not require a reduction below the statutory proportion. The judge expressly addressed special circumstances, was not obliged to give fuller reasons for not varying the statutory relationship, and the failure to quantify the guilty plea discount was not error. In any event, the Court was not satisfied under s6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 that another sentence was warranted in law and should have been passed; the sentences imposed were appropriate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 December 2001
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal; Leave to Appeal Granted and Appeal Determined
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period' 'crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 S44(2)' 'criminal Appeal Act 1912 S6(3)' 'obtaining Money by Making a False Statement']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['special Circumstances' 'non Parole Period' 'crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 S44(2)' 'criminal Appeal Act 1912 S6(3)' 'obtaining Money by Making a False Statement']

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

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal; Leave to Appeal Granted and Appeal Determined

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether a finding of special circumstances under s44(2) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 must be based exclusively or primarily on the desirability of an extended period of supervision on parole.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred or gave inadequate reasons by stating that there was no reason to find special circumstances.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to quantify, or give appropriate weight to, the utilitarian value of the guilty pleas.' 'Whether s6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 permits resentencing without the Court forming the opinion that another sentence is warranted in law and should have been passed.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err in declining to find special circumstances, because the subjective matters relied on by the Applicant were unremarkable and did not require a reduction below the statutory proportion. The judge expressly addressed special circumstances, was not obliged to give fuller reasons for not varying the statutory relationship, and the failure to quantify the guilty plea discount was not error. In any event, the Court was not satisfied under s6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 that another sentence was warranted in law and should have been passed; the sentences imposed were appropriate.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

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