R v JOHNSTON [2001] NSWCCA 93

R v JOHNSTON [2001] NSWCCA 93

The sentences and non-parole periods imposed by the District Court judges were well within their sentencing discretion, considering the applicant's criminal history, seriousness of offences, pleas, and need for rehabilitation; no error in reasoning was shown.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Applicant: Shane Michael Johnston
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
23 March 2001
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Non Parole Period, Appeal Against Sentence
Criminal Law Sentencing Non Parole Period Appeal Against 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 2 Authorities cited 1 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 4
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Shane Michael Johnston

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the total term imposed was manifestly excessive
  2. 2 Whether the sentencing judges erred in declining to fix non-parole periods less than three-quarters of the sentence
  3. 3 Whether special circumstances warranted a longer period of parole

Ratio Decidendi

The sentences and non-parole periods imposed by the District Court judges were well within their sentencing discretion, considering the applicant's criminal history, seriousness of offences, pleas, and need for rehabilitation; no error in reasoning was shown.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Appeal dismissed