Regina v Walid Alameddine [2005] NSWCCA 68

Regina v Walid Alameddine [2005] NSWCCA 68

Despite an error by the sentencing judge in adjourning the sentence where sufficient information was already available, the Court of Criminal Appeal exercised its discretion not to interfere, noting the imminence of the next appearance and the avoidance of further delay or unfairness.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 March 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'robbery in Company' 'assault With Intent to Rob' 'deferral of Sentencing' 'power Under S 11 Crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'robbery in Company' 'assault With Intent to Rob' 'deferral of Sentencing' 'power Under S 11 Crimes (sentencing Procedure) Act']

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 Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in adjourning sentence for rehabilitation demonstration under s 11 Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act when sufficient information to sentence was available.' 'Whether further adjournment served any justified sentencing purpose.']

Ratio Decidendi

Despite an error by the sentencing judge in adjourning the sentence where sufficient information was already available, the Court of Criminal Appeal exercised its discretion not to interfere, noting the imminence of the next appearance and the avoidance of further delay or unfairness.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['The order of the Court is the appeal is dismissed.']