R v Howard [2001] NSWCCA 309

R v Howard [2001] NSWCCA 309

The sentencing judge's failure to demonstrably take into account all periods of pre-sentence custody constituted error; thus, the sentence and non-parole period should be backdated to reflect time served. Otherwise, the original sentence was appropriate in all respects, and the discount for the plea of guilty was sufficient.

Parties
Prosecutor: Regina; Applicant: Peter Andrew Howard
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 August 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
leave to appeal granted; sentence quashed; sentence substituted
Legal Topics
Appeal Against Sentence, Manslaughter, Discount for Plea of Guilty, Protective Custody, Pre Sentence Custody
Criminal Law Appeal Against Sentence Manslaughter Discount for Plea of Guilty Protective Custody Pre Sentence Custody

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 3 Authorities cited 18 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 3
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Prosecutor

Peter Andrew Howard

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the discount for the plea of guilty was inadequate
  2. 2 Whether insufficient allowance was made for periods spent in protective and strict custody
  3. 3 Whether the judge failed to take into account all periods of pre-sentence custody

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge's failure to demonstrably take into account all periods of pre-sentence custody constituted error; thus, the sentence and non-parole period should be backdated to reflect time served. Otherwise, the original sentence was appropriate in all respects, and the discount for the plea of guilty was sufficient.

Court Disposition

leave to appeal granted; sentence quashed; sentence substituted

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted.
  • Sentence quashed.