Hampton v R [2014] NSWCCA 131

Hampton v R [2014] NSWCCA 131

The sentencing judge did not err in declining to take into account time served by the applicant on unrelated matters; the established line of authority in R v Niass is correct and should be followed; the principle of totality was properly applied with concurrent sentences; the sentence imposed for robbery in company was not manifestly excessive considering the seriousness of the offence, applicant’s criminal history, and need for deterrence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
18 July 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Appeal From District Court Decision
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'robbery in Company' 'steal From Person' 'effect of Time Served for Unrelated Offences' 'totality Principle' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'robbery in Company' 'steal From Person' 'effect of Time Served for Unrelated Offences' 'totality Principle' '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 Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Appeal From District Court Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether sentencing judge erred by not considering time served for unrelated matters' 'Whether prior authority (R v Niass) on this issue is wrong and should not be followed' 'Whether principle of totality was properly applied' 'Whether sentence imposed for robbery in company was manifestly excessive']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err in declining to take into account time served by the applicant on unrelated matters; the established line of authority in R v Niass is correct and should be followed; the principle of totality was properly applied with concurrent sentences; the sentence imposed for robbery in company was not manifestly excessive considering the seriousness of the offence, applicant’s criminal history, and need for deterrence.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is granted' 'The appeal is dismissed']