Regina v Peter BLANCH [1999] NSWCCA 389

Regina v Peter BLANCH [1999] NSWCCA 389

The sentencing judge's findings were open and not vulnerable to attack; the applicant's hardship submissions had to be assessed against the serious and continuing consequences for the victim; and, given the enormity of the conduct, the applicant had no justifiable sense of grievance about the comparative sentences imposed on him and his co-offenders. No appealable error in sentence was demonstrated.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 November 1999
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Extension of time and leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
['malicious Wounding With Intent to Do Grievous Bodily Harm' 'escape From Lawful Custody' 'stealing a Motor Vehicle' 'parity in Sentencing' 'extension of Time for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['malicious Wounding With Intent to Do Grievous Bodily Harm' 'escape From Lawful Custody' 'stealing a Motor Vehicle' 'parity in Sentencing' 'extension of Time for Leave to Appeal Against 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 1 Authorities cited 2 Party arguments 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether an extension of time should be granted for applying for leave to appeal against sentence.' 'Whether leave to appeal against sentence should be granted.' "Whether the sentencing judge's findings about the applicant's involvement in the escape and assaults were open on the evidence." 'Whether personal hardship relied on by the applicant warranted intervention in the sentences imposed.' 'Whether the sentences imposed created appealable error on parity grounds when compared with co-offenders Taylor and Matthews.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge's findings were open and not vulnerable to attack; the applicant's hardship submissions had to be assessed against the serious and continuing consequences for the victim; and, given the enormity of the conduct, the applicant had no justifiable sense of grievance about the comparative sentences imposed on him and his co-offenders. No appealable error in sentence was demonstrated.

Court Disposition

Extension of time and leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant an extension to and including this day, of the time for applying for leave to appeal against sentence.' 'Grant leave to appeal against sentence.' 'Appeal against sentence dismissed.']