R v Carey [2024] NSWCCA 90

R v Carey [2024] NSWCCA 90

The aggregate sentence imposed was manifestly inadequate, failing to reflect the objective gravity of the offending, which involved a sustained period of child sexual abuse by a person in a position of trust over a vulnerable child. The modest indicative sentences and lack of appropriate accumulation between counts resulted in an unreasonably low aggregate sentence. The residual discretion not to intervene should not be exercised due to the need for guidance to sentencing judges and the seriousness of the offending, despite imminence of release and factors personal to the offender.

Parties
Appellant: Rex; Respondent: Mark Anthony Carey
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 June 2024
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal (prosecution) / Sentencing Appeal – Judgment on Appeal
Outcome
Appeal allowed by majority. Sentence quashed. Respondent re-sentenced to increased aggregate sentence and non-parole period.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Prosecution Appeal, Child Sexual Offences, Manifestly Inadequate Sentence, Aggregate Sentence, Residual Discretion
Criminal Law Sentencing Prosecution Appeal Child Sexual Offences Manifestly Inadequate Sentence Aggregate Sentence Residual Discretion

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 5 Authorities cited 36 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Rex

Appellant

Mark Anthony Carey

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal (prosecution) / Sentencing Appeal – Judgment on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether aggregate sentence was manifestly inadequate
  2. 2 Whether the Court should exercise residual discretion not to intervene

Ratio Decidendi

The aggregate sentence imposed was manifestly inadequate, failing to reflect the objective gravity of the offending, which involved a sustained period of child sexual abuse by a person in a position of trust over a vulnerable child. The modest indicative sentences and lack of appropriate accumulation between counts resulted in an unreasonably low aggregate sentence. The residual discretion not to intervene should not be exercised due to the need for guidance to sentencing judges and the seriousness of the offending, despite imminence of release and factors personal to the offender.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed by majority. Sentence quashed. Respondent re-sentenced to increased aggregate sentence and non-parole period.

Orders

  • Appeal allowed.
  • Sentence imposed by Williams DCJ on 15 December 2023 quashed.