R v Moore [2012] NSWCCA 3

R v Moore [2012] NSWCCA 3

Although the offence of perverting the course of justice was serious and some additional penalty was called for, the sentencing judge's sentence included a 4 month accumulation in the head sentence. The Court held that the DPP's argument focused too narrowly on the non-parole period, because parole was itself part of the sentence and breach could result in further imprisonment. In the circumstances, the Court was not satisfied that no course other than partially accumulating the non-parole period was open to the sentencing judge, nor that totality required any additional penalty. The sentence was not shown to be manifestly inadequate.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
06 February 2012
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence Pursuant to S 5 D of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 / Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal From Sentence Imposed in the District Court at Wagga Wagga
Outcome
Crown appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['crown Appeal' 'manifest Inadequacy' 'plea of Guilty' 'totality' 'non Parole Period' 'parole' 'intent to Pervert the Course of Justice' 'driving Whilst Disqualified' 'variation of Bail' 'forgery']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['crown Appeal' 'manifest Inadequacy' 'plea of Guilty' 'totality' 'non Parole Period' 'parole' 'intent to Pervert the Course of Justice' 'driving Whilst Disqualified' 'variation of Bail' 'forgery']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Crown Appeal Against Sentence Pursuant to S 5 D of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 / Appeal to the Court of Criminal Appeal From Sentence Imposed in the District Court at Wagga Wagga

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by imposing a non-parole period for the perverting the course of justice offence that was wholly concurrent with the non-parole periods for driving whilst disqualified offences.' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to consider the principle of totality when determining the commencement date for the sentence for perverting the course of justice.' 'Whether the sentence imposed for doing an act with intent to pervert the course of justice was manifestly inadequate.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the offence of perverting the course of justice was serious and some additional penalty was called for, the sentencing judge's sentence included a 4 month accumulation in the head sentence. The Court held that the DPP's argument focused too narrowly on the non-parole period, because parole was itself part of the sentence and breach could result in further imprisonment. In the circumstances, the Court was not satisfied that no course other than partially accumulating the non-parole period was open to the sentencing judge, nor that totality required any additional penalty. The sentence was not shown to be manifestly inadequate.

Court Disposition

Crown appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed.']