R v MI [2018] NSWCCA 251

R v MI [2018] NSWCCA 251

MI partially failed to comply with his undertaking to assist law enforcement by providing a supplementary statement but then refusing to give evidence, without reasonable excuse. Although the failure was not entire due to limited partial compliance, the value of the partial compliance was practically nil. The Court exercised its discretion to remove the entire discount for future assistance, thus quashing the original sentence and imposing the higher sentence indicated by the sentencing judge as appropriate without the discount.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
09 November 2018
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Crown appeal upheld; original sentence quashed; respondent resentenced.
Legal Topics
['crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'discount for Assistance to Authorities' 'failure to Comply With Undertaking' 'section 16 AC Crimes Act 1914 (cth)' 'reasonable Excuse' 'partial Compliance']
['criminal Law'] ['crown Appeal Against Sentence' 'discount for Assistance to Authorities' 'failure to Comply With Undertaking' 'section 16 AC Crimes Act 1914 (cth)' 'reasonable Excuse' 'partial Compliance']

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 Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the respondent, MI, failed to comply with his undertaking to assist law enforcement agencies without reasonable excuse under s 16AC of the Crimes Act 1914 (Cth)' 'Whether the failure to comply was entire or partial' 'Whether the Crown appeal should be allowed and the discount for future assistance removed']

Ratio Decidendi

MI partially failed to comply with his undertaking to assist law enforcement by providing a supplementary statement but then refusing to give evidence, without reasonable excuse. Although the failure was not entire due to limited partial compliance, the value of the partial compliance was practically nil. The Court exercised its discretion to remove the entire discount for future assistance, thus quashing the original sentence and imposing the higher sentence indicated by the sentencing judge as appropriate without the discount.

Court Disposition

Crown appeal upheld; original sentence quashed; respondent resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Crown appeal upheld.' 'The sentence imposed upon the respondent, MI, by Hunt DCJ on 16 September 2016, is quashed.' 'In substitution, the respondent is sentenced to a head sentence of imprisonment for 8 years, 1 month and 2 weeks with a non-parole period of 5 years, each to commence on 14 February 2015.']