Omar, O. v. Lanham, G.E. [1985] FCA 598

Omar, O. v. Lanham, G.E. [1985] FCA 598

The sentence of nine months' imprisonment was within the trial Judge's discretion; there was no lack of parity in sentences given the appellant's antecedents and differences from the principal offender, the absence of exceptional circumstances did not mandate a lesser sentence, and s.17A is directory, not mandatory.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
26 November 1985
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sentence Imposed by Supreme Court
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'parity of Sentences' 'weight of Prior Sentence' 'family Circumstances in Sentencing' 'fresh Evidence on Appeal']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'parity of Sentences' 'weight of Prior Sentence' 'family Circumstances in Sentencing' 'fresh Evidence on Appeal']

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 / Appeal From Sentence Imposed by Supreme Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was lack of parity between sentences imposed on the appellant and the principal offender' 'Whether sufficient weight was given to the sentence imposed by the magistrate' 'Whether the requirements of s.17A(1) Crimes Act 1914 were properly observed' 'Whether the minimum sentence possible should have been imposed' 'Whether family circumstances warranted a lesser sentence']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence of nine months' imprisonment was within the trial Judge's discretion; there was no lack of parity in sentences given the appellant's antecedents and differences from the principal offender, the absence of exceptional circumstances did not mandate a lesser sentence, and s.17A is directory, not mandatory.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The appeal be dismissed.']