R v Best [2001] NSWCCA 401

R v Best [2001] NSWCCA 401

The sentencing judge erred in dealing with the respondent under Pt 3 Div 4 of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 because insufficient weight was given to the gravity of the offences, which involved serious violence to a very young infant; the circumstances compelled that the respondent be dealt with according to law, so the Crown appeal had to be allowed and the matters remitted for sentencing by another District Court judge.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 October 2001
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Pursuant to S 5 B of the Criminal Appeal Act Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court / Appeal Hearing in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed; orders concerning the respondent quashed; matters remitted to the District Court for sentencing according to law by another judge.
Legal Topics
['crown Sentence Appeal' 'sentencing of Juvenile Offender' 'whether to Deal With Offender According to Law or Under Pt 3 Div 4 of the Children (criminal Proceedings) Act 1987' 'violence Against Infant Child' "proceeding in Respondent's Absence"]
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' "children's Criminal Proceedings"] ['crown Sentence Appeal' 'sentencing of Juvenile Offender' 'whether to Deal With Offender According to Law or Under Pt 3 Div 4 of the Children (criminal Proceedings) Act 1987' 'violence Against Infant Child' "proceeding in Respondent's Absence"]

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

Crown Appeal Pursuant to S 5 B of the Criminal Appeal Act Against Sentences Imposed in the District Court / Appeal Hearing in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the appeal should proceed in the respondent's absence after notice of the hearing had been given." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred by dealing with the respondent under Pt 3 Div 4 of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 rather than according to law.' 'Whether the sentences and orders imposed should be quashed and the matters remitted for sentencing according to law.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred in dealing with the respondent under Pt 3 Div 4 of the Children (Criminal Proceedings) Act 1987 because insufficient weight was given to the gravity of the offences, which involved serious violence to a very young infant; the circumstances compelled that the respondent be dealt with according to law, so the Crown appeal had to be allowed and the matters remitted for sentencing by another District Court judge.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; orders concerning the respondent quashed; matters remitted to the District Court for sentencing according to law by another judge.

Orders

  • ['The appeal be allowed.' 'The orders made concerning the respondent be quashed.' 'The matters be remitted to the District Court for the sentencing of the respondent by another judge of the District Court according to law and that such sentencing procedure be carried out at a time and place to be appointed by that...