Regina v Hunt [2002] NSWCCA 266

Regina v Hunt [2002] NSWCCA 266

The sentencing judge failed to properly apply the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, particularly s.99(4), and did not independently consider the applicant's circumstances or the offence. This Court must re-sentence afresh. The appropriate sentence is twenty months imprisonment, backdated to 16 November 2001, with a non-parole period of ten months.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 June 2002
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sentence Imposed for Breach of Bond
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence imposed by Shillington DCJ quashed; applicant re-sentenced to twenty months imprisonment with non-parole period of ten months, backdated.
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'suspended Sentence' 'breach of Conditions' 'application of S.99 Crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'suspended Sentence' 'breach of Conditions' 'application of S.99 Crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act 1999']

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

Criminal Appeal / Appeal From Sentence Imposed for Breach of Bond

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the District Court judge erred in sentencing the applicant by failing to comply with Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 including sections 24, 98(3), and 99' 'Whether the judge erred in failing to adequately consider the facts and circumstances of the offence and subjective features of the applicant' 'Whether special circumstances warranted a departure from standard non-parole period']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge failed to properly apply the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999, particularly s.99(4), and did not independently consider the applicant's circumstances or the offence. This Court must re-sentence afresh. The appropriate sentence is twenty months imprisonment, backdated to 16 November 2001, with a non-parole period of ten months.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence imposed by Shillington DCJ quashed; applicant re-sentenced to twenty months imprisonment with non-parole period of ten months, backdated.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal allowed.' 'Sentence imposed by Shillington DCJ quashed.' 'In lieu thereof, applicant is sentenced to twenty months imprisonment, commencing 16 November 2001 and expiring 15 July 2003.' 'Non-parole period of ten months commencing 16 November 2001, expiring 15 September 2002, on...