Buckley v R; R v Buckley [2012] NSWCCA 85

Buckley v R; R v Buckley [2012] NSWCCA 85

The trial judge's summing up identified the essential elements, disputed issues, and relevant evidence, meeting the requirements as restated by statute and case law. No miscarriage of justice resulted. The sentencing judge properly considered and applied relevant guideline judgments and made a supported finding that the offender's moral culpability was in the mid-range; the sentence, though lenient, was not manifestly inadequate or in error.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 May 2012
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence
Outcome
Application for leave to appeal against conviction refused; Application for leave to appeal against conviction dismissed; Director's appeal against sentence dismissed.
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Conviction' 'appeal Against Sentence' 'aggravated Dangerous Navigation Occasioning Death' 'summing Up to Jury' 'manifestly Inadequate Sentence' 'moral Culpability' 'guideline Judgments']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Conviction' 'appeal Against Sentence' 'aggravated Dangerous Navigation Occasioning Death' 'summing Up to Jury' 'manifestly Inadequate Sentence' 'moral Culpability' 'guideline Judgments']

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 / Court of Criminal Appeal Appeal Against Conviction and Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether trial judge erred in presentation of evidence during summing up to jury' 'Whether failure to summarise evidence by reference to issues warranted leave to appeal' 'Whether sentences imposed were manifestly inadequate' 'Whether trial judge failed to assess adequately the moral culpability of the defendant' 'Whether trial judge erred in assessing the objective seriousness of the offence']

Ratio Decidendi

The trial judge's summing up identified the essential elements, disputed issues, and relevant evidence, meeting the requirements as restated by statute and case law. No miscarriage of justice resulted. The sentencing judge properly considered and applied relevant guideline judgments and made a supported finding that the offender's moral culpability was in the mid-range; the sentence, though lenient, was not manifestly inadequate or in error.

Court Disposition

Application for leave to appeal against conviction refused; Application for leave to appeal against conviction dismissed; Director's appeal against sentence dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Refuse the offender leave under r 4 of the Criminal Appeal Rules to raise grounds challenging the summing up to the jury.' 'Refuse the offender leave to appeal against his convictions.' "Dismiss the Director's appeal against the inadequacy of the sentences imposed for the offences of dangerous navigation causing...