R v Stephens [2024] NSWCCA 170

R v Stephens [2024] NSWCCA 170

The aggregate sentence imposed by the sentencing judge was manifestly inadequate as it failed to sufficiently reflect the seriousness and totality of the respondent's offending, the harm done to the victim, and the necessity for general and specific deterrence and community protection in domestic violence sentencing. The indicative sentences were exceedingly lenient, cumulative factors were under-applied, and subjective features were excessively, and sometimes doubly, taken into account, necessitating appellate re-sentencing to a longer term of imprisonment with an appropriately extended non-parole period.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
11 September 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Crown Appeal Against Sentence (on the Ground of Manifest Inadequacy); Orders Made Following Re Sentencing
Outcome
Appeal allowed; sentence quashed; respondent resentenced.
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'domestic Violence' 'appeals Against Sentence' 'aggregate Sentencing' 'deterrence' 'double Counting in Sentencing' 'totality Principle']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'domestic Violence' 'appeals Against Sentence' 'aggregate Sentencing' 'deterrence' 'double Counting in Sentencing' 'totality Principle']

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 / Crown Appeal Against Sentence (on the Ground of Manifest Inadequacy); Orders Made Following Re Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence imposed by the District Court was manifestly inadequate for 14 domestic violence offences committed by the respondent' 'Whether the sentencing judge gave insufficient weight to general and specific deterrence and community protection' "Whether subjective matters, including rehabilitation prospects and youth, were given undue prominence or 'double counted'" 'Whether the principle of totality was properly applied in determining the aggregate sentence']

Ratio Decidendi

The aggregate sentence imposed by the sentencing judge was manifestly inadequate as it failed to sufficiently reflect the seriousness and totality of the respondent's offending, the harm done to the victim, and the necessity for general and specific deterrence and community protection in domestic violence sentencing. The indicative sentences were exceedingly lenient, cumulative factors were under-applied, and subjective features were excessively, and sometimes doubly, taken into account, necessitating appellate re-sentencing to a longer term of imprisonment with an appropriately extended non-parole period.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed; sentence quashed; respondent resentenced.

Orders

  • ['The appeal is allowed.' 'The sentence imposed on 1 December 2023 is quashed.' 'An aggregate sentence of imprisonment of 6 years, with a non-parole period of 4 years, commencing 29 November 2023, is imposed. The respondent is eligible for parole 28 November 2027. The sentence expires 28 November 2029.' 'Pursuant to...