R v AB (No. 2) [2011] NSWCCA 256

R v AB (No. 2) [2011] NSWCCA 256

Because of a misapprehension of law regarding the application of aggregate sentencing and a slip in sentence calculation resulting in a gap, the orders must be set aside and resentencing conducted using individual sentences rather than aggregate sentencing.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
02 December 2011
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application Under Rule 50 C to Correct or Vary Previous Appeal Orders
Outcome
Crown appeal allowed; previous orders set aside; Respondent resentenced with specific terms for each count; parole release date set; driving disqualification orders confirmed.
Legal Topics
['crown Appeals' 'sentencing' 'aggregate Sentencing' 'correction of Orders']
['criminal Law'] ['crown Appeals' 'sentencing' 'aggregate Sentencing' 'correction of Orders']

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 / Application Under Rule 50 C to Correct or Vary Previous Appeal Orders

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether there was a slip in calculation resulting in a gap between sentences' 'Whether aggregate sentencing provisions were wrongly applied given timing of guilty pleas' 'Whether arithmetical errors in total sentence calculation required correction']

Ratio Decidendi

Because of a misapprehension of law regarding the application of aggregate sentencing and a slip in sentence calculation resulting in a gap, the orders must be set aside and resentencing conducted using individual sentences rather than aggregate sentencing.

Court Disposition

Crown appeal allowed; previous orders set aside; Respondent resentenced with specific terms for each count; parole release date set; driving disqualification orders confirmed.

Orders

  • ['Orders made by the Court on 14 October 2011 are set aside.' 'Crown appeal allowed.' 'Sentences imposed in the District Court on 9 March 2011 with respect to the first, second, third and fourth counts are quashed.' 'On the first count, the Respondent is sentenced to a fixed term of imprisonment of three months...