R v Altaf THAWER [2009] NSWCCA 158

R v Altaf THAWER [2009] NSWCCA 158

The sentencing judge's discretion miscarried due to failure to adequately consider and provide reasons for departure from the standard non-parole period and the appropriateness of a suspended sentence given the gravely serious nature of the offence; thus, the original sentence was manifestly inadequate and should be replaced with a custodial term reflecting the gravity of the offending.

Parties
Applicant: Regina; Respondent: Altaf Thawer
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 June 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Crown Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence quashed; respondent resentenced to term of imprisonment.
Legal Topics
Infliction of Grievous Bodily Harm, Sentencing, Suspended Sentence, Standard Non Parole Period, Crown Appeals
Criminal Law Infliction of Grievous Bodily Harm Sentencing Suspended Sentence Standard Non Parole Period Crown Appeals

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 4 Authorities cited 11 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 7
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Applicant

Altaf Thawer

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Crown Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentence imposed in the District Court was manifestly inadequate
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing objective seriousness
  3. 3 Appropriate application and departure from standard non-parole period

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge's discretion miscarried due to failure to adequately consider and provide reasons for departure from the standard non-parole period and the appropriateness of a suspended sentence given the gravely serious nature of the offence; thus, the original sentence was manifestly inadequate and should be replaced with a custodial term reflecting the gravity of the offending.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence quashed; respondent resentenced to term of imprisonment.

Orders

  • The appeal is allowed and the sentence imposed in the District Court quashed.
  • The respondent is sentenced to a term of imprisonment made up of a non-parole period of 16 months and a balance of term of 30 months to date from 9 April 2009. The non-parole period is to expire on 8 August 2010, the date upon which the respondent is eligible to be released to parole.