Stines v R [2019] NSWCCA 115

Stines v R [2019] NSWCCA 115

The ground alleging insufficient weight to intellectual disability failed because the sentencing judge repeatedly considered the applicant's mild intellectual disability, accepted that it played a very limited role in the offending, and was entitled to find that it only slightly reduced moral culpability and did not materially reduce deterrence. However, the sentence was manifestly excessive because the applicant's subjective case was exceptionally powerful: he had suffered a serious assault in custody by a correctional officer, had ongoing physical and psychological consequences, was labelled a Crown witness or dog after giving evidence, had been placed on protection or SMAP, and had...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal and Sentence Appeal in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence imposed on 24 August 2018 set aside; applicant resentenced to imprisonment for 5 years and 3 months with a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months.
Legal Topics
['aggravated Robbery With Wounding' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'intellectual Disability and Moral Culpability' 'onerous Custodial Conditions' 'special Circumstances' 'guilty Plea Discount']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['aggravated Robbery With Wounding' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'intellectual Disability and Moral Culpability' 'onerous Custodial Conditions' 'special Circumstances' 'guilty Plea Discount']

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 Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal and Sentence Appeal in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred by failing to give sufficient weight to the applicant's mild intellectual disability in reducing objective seriousness or moral culpability." 'Whether the sentence imposed for aggravated robbery with wounding was manifestly excessive.' "Whether the applicant's serious prior assault in custody and its ongoing consequences made imprisonment unusually onerous and required a lesser sentence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The ground alleging insufficient weight to intellectual disability failed because the sentencing judge repeatedly considered the applicant's mild intellectual disability, accepted that it played a very limited role in the offending, and was entitled to find that it only slightly reduced moral culpability and did not materially reduce deterrence. However, the sentence was manifestly excessive because the applicant's subjective case was exceptionally powerful: he had suffered a serious assault in custody by a correctional officer, had ongoing physical and psychological consequences, was labelled a Crown witness or dog after giving evidence, had been placed on protection or SMAP, and had...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal allowed; sentence imposed on 24 August 2018 set aside; applicant resentenced to imprisonment for 5 years and 3 months with a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Allow the appeal and set aside the sentence imposed on 24 August 2018, and in lieu thereof, sentence the applicant to imprisonment for a period of 5 years and 3 months, commencing on 24 August 2018 and expiring on 23 November 2023, with a non-parole period of 3 years and 6 months...