R v Slack [2004] NSWCCA 128

R v Slack [2004] NSWCCA 128

The appeal against conviction was dismissed because, despite discrepancies and deficiencies in the complainant's evidence, the jury was entitled, with the benefit of seeing and hearing the witnesses, to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the appellant's guilt. The sentence appeal was allowed because the District Court sentences were manifestly excessive: the offences were serious, involved a young complainant and a breach of trust, but were relatively low in the hierarchy of s61J offending because they involved digital penetration assumed to be slight, no physical violence or threat beyond the penetration, no medical evidence of physical injury, and two offences occurring in close...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 May 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the District Court
Outcome
Appeal against conviction dismissed; application for leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence allowed; District Court sentences quashed; appellant resentenced.
Legal Topics
['aggravated Sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'unsafe or Unreasonable Verdict' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'victim Impact Statement' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['aggravated Sexual Intercourse Without Consent' 'unsafe or Unreasonable Verdict' 'manifestly Excessive Sentence' 'victim Impact Statement' 'non Parole Period']

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 1 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Conviction and Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence From the District Court

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the jury's verdicts of guilty were unreasonable and could not be supported on the evidence." 'Whether the sentences imposed in the District Court were manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

The appeal against conviction was dismissed because, despite discrepancies and deficiencies in the complainant's evidence, the jury was entitled, with the benefit of seeing and hearing the witnesses, to be satisfied beyond reasonable doubt of the appellant's guilt. The sentence appeal was allowed because the District Court sentences were manifestly excessive: the offences were serious, involved a young complainant and a breach of trust, but were relatively low in the hierarchy of s61J offending because they involved digital penetration assumed to be slight, no physical violence or threat beyond the penetration, no medical evidence of physical injury, and two offences occurring in close...

Court Disposition

Appeal against conviction dismissed; application for leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence allowed; District Court sentences quashed; appellant resentenced.

Orders

  • ['Appeal against conviction dismissed.' 'Application for leave to appeal against sentence granted and appeal allowed.' 'Sentences in the District Court quashed and in lieu thereof the appellant sentenced on each count to three years imprisonment to date from 26 June 2003 with a non parole period of eighteen months...