Regina v MMK [2006] NSWCCA 272

Regina v MMK [2006] NSWCCA 272

It was within the sentencing judge's discretion, given the circumstances and the substantial sentence already imposed, to order concurrency for the minor additional criminality; the appeal did not demonstrate an error in the exercise of that discretion and was dismissed.

Parties
Appellant: Regina; Respondent: MMK
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 September 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal, Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Concurrent Sentences, Totality Principle, Appeal Against Sentence, Vulnerability of Victim
Criminal Law Sentencing Concurrent Sentences Totality Principle Appeal Against Sentence Vulnerability of Victim

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 15 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Appellant

MMK

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal, Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether fully concurrent sentence was inadequate
  2. 2 Relationship between s 3A of Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act and principle of totality
  3. 3 Whether vulnerability under s 21A(2)(l) of Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act should have been taken into account

Ratio Decidendi

It was within the sentencing judge's discretion, given the circumstances and the substantial sentence already imposed, to order concurrency for the minor additional criminality; the appeal did not demonstrate an error in the exercise of that discretion and was dismissed.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • The appeal is dismissed.