Egan v R [2018] NSWCCA 235

Egan v R [2018] NSWCCA 235

The sentencing judge was entitled to find that the applicant's background, although involving hardship and financial disadvantage, did not amount to profound childhood deprivation engaging the Bugmy principle so as to reduce moral culpability or diminish deterrence. The findings of no meaningful remorse and guarded prospects of rehabilitation were open, and the sentence, imposed for three significant drug supply-related offences with partial accumulation and a generous non-parole adjustment, was not affected by error and was not manifestly excessive.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 October 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the Sydney District Court Under S 5(1)(c) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (nsw)
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['supply Greater Than Indictable Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'dealing With Property Suspected of Being Proceeds of Crime' 'childhood Disadvantage in Sentencing' 'prospects of Rehabilitation' 'manifest Excess']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['supply Greater Than Indictable Quantity of Prohibited Drug' 'dealing With Property Suspected of Being Proceeds of Crime' 'childhood Disadvantage in Sentencing' 'prospects of Rehabilitation' '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 Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the Sydney District Court Under S 5(1)(c) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (nsw)

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to appropriately regard and allow a sufficient discount for the applicant's childhood disadvantage in accordance with Bugmy v The Queen (2013) 249 CLR 571; [2013] HCA 37." "Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to have appropriate regard to the applicant's prospects of rehabilitation." 'Whether the aggregate sentence imposed was unreasonably or plainly unjust.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge was entitled to find that the applicant's background, although involving hardship and financial disadvantage, did not amount to profound childhood deprivation engaging the Bugmy principle so as to reduce moral culpability or diminish deterrence. The findings of no meaningful remorse and guarded prospects of rehabilitation were open, and the sentence, imposed for three significant drug supply-related offences with partial accumulation and a generous non-parole adjustment, was not affected by error and was not manifestly excessive.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Appeal dismissed.']