REGINA v. PELL [2004] NSWCCA 205

REGINA v. PELL [2004] NSWCCA 205

The trial judge erred by imposing a sentence for one count that reflected the total criminality of all offences, contrary to authority. The aggregate sentence was excessive given the applicant's circumstances, and the appellate court must intervene to re-sentence appropriately, recognising special circumstances and the seriousness of each count.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Appellant: Pell
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
08 April 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Sentences quashed. Appellant re-sentenced on each count with specified terms.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Indecent Assault, Special Circumstances, Re Sentencing, Excessive Sentence

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 2 Authorities cited 3 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Pell

Appellant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed was excessive
  2. 2 Whether the trial judge erred by not applying special circumstances under s.44 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act (NSW) 1999
  3. 3 Whether the sentence structure improperly reflected the criminality of the individual offences

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge erred by imposing a sentence for one count that reflected the total criminality of all offences, contrary to authority. The aggregate sentence was excessive given the applicant's circumstances, and the appellate court must intervene to re-sentence appropriately, recognising special circumstances and the seriousness of each count.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Sentences quashed. Appellant re-sentenced on each count with specified terms.

Orders

  • Grant leave to appeal.
  • Appeal allowed.