RP v R [2013] NSWCCA 192
The sentencing judge gave excessive weight to the victim impact statement, which resulted in a sentence that was plainly unjust. The factual circumstances placed the offending near the bottom of the relevant range and the discretion miscarried, requiring appellate intervention and resentence.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 22 August 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- appeal allowed; sentence quashed; applicant resentenced
- Legal Topics
- ['sentencing' 'indecent Assault' 'assessment of Objective Seriousness' 'victim Impact Statements' 'manifest Excess' 'resentence']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred in assessing the objective seriousness of the offence' 'Whether excessive weight was given to the victim impact statement' 'Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive']
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge gave excessive weight to the victim impact statement, which resulted in a sentence that was plainly unjust. The factual circumstances placed the offending near the bottom of the relevant range and the discretion miscarried, requiring appellate intervention and resentence.
Court Disposition
appeal allowed; sentence quashed; applicant resentenced
Orders
- ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal allowed.' 'Sentence imposed by Armitage DCJ on 6 February 2012 for the single count on the first indictment is quashed.' 'In lieu, applicant is sentenced to two months imprisonment commencing 7 January 2010 and expiring 6 March 2010.' 'Commencement and expiration dates for...
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment