Cooper v R [2021] NSWCCA 292

Cooper v R [2021] NSWCCA 292

The appeal failed because the evidence of any current mental disorder was limited and unsatisfactory, and the sentencing judge was entitled to treat the applicant's ADHD history and entrenched substance abuse as contextual rather than as reducing moral culpability or diminishing general deterrence. The judge...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 December 2021
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Aggregate Sentence Imposed in the District Court of New South Wales
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['supply of Prohibited Drug' 'failure to Comply With Reporting Obligations' 'mental Conditions in Sentencing' 'manifest Excess' 'intensive Correction Orders' 'community Correction Orders']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['supply of Prohibited Drug' 'failure to Comply With Reporting Obligations' 'mental Conditions in Sentencing' 'manifest Excess' 'intensive Correction Orders' 'community Correction Orders']

Source-derived case record

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 Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Aggregate Sentence Imposed in the District Court of New South Wales

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge failed to apply principles relating to mental disorders when sentencing the applicant.' "Whether the sentencing judge's remarks sufficiently explained how the applicant's mental conditions were considered." 'Whether the aggregate sentence of 3 years and 6 months imprisonment with a non-parole period of 2 years was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal failed because the evidence of any current mental disorder was limited and unsatisfactory, and the sentencing judge was entitled to treat the applicant's ADHD history and entrenched substance abuse as contextual rather than as reducing moral culpability or diminishing general deterrence. The judge adequately explained his approach in an ex tempore sentence and was not required to apply De La Rosa favourably to the applicant. The aggregate sentence was not manifestly excessive given the statutory maximum, at least 19 methylamphetamine supplies in 18 days, the applicant's significant criminal history, limited subjective case, medium to medium-high risk of reoffending, poor...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']