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.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Judgment on Crown Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 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.']
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment