R v Centofanti & Schaeffer [2001] NSWCCA 107
The seriousness of the offences justified the sentences for Schaeffer; for Centofanti, the minimum term failed to account for his lesser role and personal circumstances, requiring adjustment. Parity and totality principles require differentiating between the relative criminality of co-offenders.
- Parties
- Appellant: Regina; Applicant: Peter Karl Centofanti; Applicant: Douglas Allen Schaeffer
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 26 March 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal
- Outcome
- Schaeffer - Leave to appeal against sentence granted, appeal dismissed; Centofanti - Leave to appeal against sentence granted, appeal allowed, sentence quashed and new sentence imposed.
- Legal Topics
- Sentencing, Armed Robbery, Parity, Principle of Totality
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Regina
Appellant
Peter Karl Centofanti
Applicant
Douglas Allen Schaeffer
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentence Appeal
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether sentences imposed on the applicants were manifestly excessive
- 2 Appropriate application of parity and the principle of totality in sentencing for armed robbery
Ratio Decidendi
The seriousness of the offences justified the sentences for Schaeffer; for Centofanti, the minimum term failed to account for his lesser role and personal circumstances, requiring adjustment. Parity and totality principles require differentiating between the relative criminality of co-offenders.
Court Disposition
Schaeffer - Leave to appeal against sentence granted, appeal dismissed; Centofanti - Leave to appeal against sentence granted, appeal allowed, sentence quashed and new sentence imposed.
Orders
- Leave to appeal against the sentence imposed upon Centofanti granted.
- Appeal allowed; sentence quashed.
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