R v Speeding, Bradley Adam [2001] NSWCCA 105

R v Speeding, Bradley Adam [2001] NSWCCA 105

The sentencing judge failed to give adequate effect to the multiplicity of offences, the fact that two were committed while on bail, and the serious impact on victims, resulting in sentences that were manifestly inadequate; appropriate sentence requires partial accumulation of later sentences, increased terms for the earlier offences, and higher non-parole periods.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Crown Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal upheld
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'crown Appeals' 'robbery' 'totality Principle' 'bail Abuse']

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 Appeal / Judgment on Crown Appeal Against Sentence

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentences imposed were manifestly inadequate' 'Whether sufficient weight was given to multiplicity of offences and commission while on bail' 'Whether the impact on victims and seriousness of offences was properly weighed against subjective factors']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge failed to give adequate effect to the multiplicity of offences, the fact that two were committed while on bail, and the serious impact on victims, resulting in sentences that were manifestly inadequate; appropriate sentence requires partial accumulation of later sentences, increased terms for the earlier offences, and higher non-parole periods.

Court Disposition

Appeal upheld

Orders

  • ['Five of the six sentences quashed; respondent resentenced as described in paragraph 31 and as amended in paragraph 35, including extension of total sentence and non-parole period by two years; orders made in accordance with signed short minutes of order.']