Regina v Suey [2005] NSWCCA 22

Regina v Suey [2005] NSWCCA 22

The evidence that the applicant prevented a co-offender from inflicting further harm did not mitigate the criminality of the offences for which he was sentenced and would not have affected the findings on contrition or provided a basis for any parity argument; sentences imposed should stand.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 February 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Sentence Review
Outcome
sentences imposed by Judge Morgan to stand
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'abduction' 'aggravated Sexual Assault' 'breaking and Entering' 'parity of Sentence']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'abduction' 'aggravated Sexual Assault' 'breaking and Entering' 'parity of Sentence']

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 / Sentence Review

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether evidence of applicant preventing further harm should affect sentence' "Whether sentencing judge's findings on contrition should change" 'Whether parity argument with co-offenders has merit']

Ratio Decidendi

The evidence that the applicant prevented a co-offender from inflicting further harm did not mitigate the criminality of the offences for which he was sentenced and would not have affected the findings on contrition or provided a basis for any parity argument; sentences imposed should stand.

Court Disposition

sentences imposed by Judge Morgan to stand

Orders

  • ['The order of the Court is that the sentences imposed by her Honour Judge Morgan should stand.']