R v Van Ryn [2016] NSWCCA 1

R v Van Ryn [2016] NSWCCA 1

The sentencing judge's failure to make or state an assessment of objective seriousness for the offences, combined with inadequate reasoning regarding deterrence and community protection and manifest inadequacy in the length of the sentence, constituted error. The original sentence was quashed and a higher aggregate sentence imposed to be proportionate to the gravity of the conduct and to maintain public confidence in the criminal justice system.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
10 February 2016
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal; Decision on Appeal and Resentencing
Outcome
Crown appeal allowed; sentence quashed; respondent resentenced
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'child Sexual Assault' 'crown Appeals' 'objective Seriousness' 'deterrence' 'protection of Community' 'aggregate Sentencing']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'child Sexual Assault' 'crown Appeals' 'objective Seriousness' 'deterrence' 'protection of Community' 'aggregate Sentencing']

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 Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal; Decision on Appeal and Resentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to assess the objective seriousness of the offences.' 'Whether the original sentence was manifestly inadequate.' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in the treatment of offences taken into account (Form 1 offences).' 'Whether the judge erred in having regard to the possibility that some offences could be dealt with summarily in the Local Court.' 'Whether errors in the assessment and weighting of subjective factors, deterrence, and community protection justified appellate intervention.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge's failure to make or state an assessment of objective seriousness for the offences, combined with inadequate reasoning regarding deterrence and community protection and manifest inadequacy in the length of the sentence, constituted error. The original sentence was quashed and a higher aggregate sentence imposed to be proportionate to the gravity of the conduct and to maintain public confidence in the criminal justice system.

Court Disposition

Crown appeal allowed; sentence quashed; respondent resentenced

Orders

  • ['Crown appeal allowed.' 'Sentence imposed in the District Court on 9 September 2015 quashed.' 'Respondent sentenced to an aggregate term of imprisonment of 18 years with a non-parole period of 13 years 6 months. The sentence is to date from 10 December 2014. The offender will be eligible for release on parole at...