RL v R [2015] NSWCCA 106

RL v R [2015] NSWCCA 106

The sentencing judge materially erred by treating the offending as planned or organised criminal activity within s 21A(2)(n), by adopting indicative sentences for offences committed when the applicant was a juvenile that did not adequately reflect the likely contemporaneous treatment under child welfare legislation and sentencing principles then applicable, and by taking into account broader family consequences from a victim impact statement beyond its proper use. The ground concerning subjective circumstances was rejected. Because material error was established, the Court determined the appropriate sentence and held that a lesser aggregate sentence of 6 years imprisonment with a...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
22 May 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the District Court of New South Wales; Appeal Allowed and Applicant Resentenced
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence set aside; applicant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['sentencing for Sexual Offences Committed as a Juvenile' 'aggregate Sentencing' 'planning or Organisation as an Aggravating Factor' 'victim Impact Statements' 'manifest Excess' 'non Parole Period' 'form 1 Offences']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['sentencing for Sexual Offences Committed as a Juvenile' 'aggregate Sentencing' 'planning or Organisation as an Aggravating Factor' 'victim Impact Statements' 'manifest Excess' 'non Parole Period' 'form 1 Offences']

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 Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the District Court of New South Wales; Appeal Allowed and Applicant Resentenced

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in treating the offences as part of planned or organised criminal activity under s 21A(2)(n) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).' "Whether sufficient allowance was made for the applicant's youth at the time of offending and for sentencing principles applicable at the time of the offending." "Whether the sentencing judge failed to give proper effect to the applicant's favourable subjective circumstances." 'Whether the sentencing judge impermissibly used a victim impact statement containing material beyond harm directly resulting from the offence against that victim.' 'Whether, once material error was established, the Court should resentence the applicant and whether the sentence was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge materially erred by treating the offending as planned or organised criminal activity within s 21A(2)(n), by adopting indicative sentences for offences committed when the applicant was a juvenile that did not adequately reflect the likely contemporaneous treatment under child welfare legislation and sentencing principles then applicable, and by taking into account broader family consequences from a victim impact statement beyond its proper use. The ground concerning subjective circumstances was rejected. Because material error was established, the Court determined the appropriate sentence and held that a lesser aggregate sentence of 6 years imprisonment with a...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence set aside; applicant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Grant the applicant leave to appeal.' 'Allow the appeal and set aside the sentence imposed by the sentencing judge on 14 February 2014.' 'Resentence the applicant to imprisonment for 6 years, with a non-parole period of 2 years 9 months to date from 14 February 2014 and a balance of term of 3 years 3 months.' 'The...