BREE v R [2006] NSWCCA 124

BREE v R [2006] NSWCCA 124

Although De Marco received a lesser sentence despite a more serious role and larger quantity of cannabis, his sentence was lenient or manifestly inadequate. The applicant's effective sentence was appropriate to his own criminality, including multiple drug supply offences, his role as a principal distributor or...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
13 April 2006
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['parity of Sentence' 'drug Supply' 'drug Syndicate' 'justifiable Sense of Grievance' 'disparity Between Co Offenders' 'compounding Sentencing Error']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['parity of Sentence' 'drug Supply' 'drug Syndicate' 'justifiable Sense of Grievance' 'disparity Between Co Offenders' 'compounding Sentencing Error']

Source-derived case record

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 Sentence Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the New South Wales Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether disparity between the applicant's sentence and sentences imposed on co-offenders, particularly Elliott De Marco, gave rise to a justifiable sense of grievance." "Whether reducing the applicant's sentence to achieve parity with a manifestly inadequate sentence imposed on a co-offender would compound error." "Whether the applicant's sentence was within the appropriate range having regard to his role, offences, criminal history, and Form 1 matter."]

Ratio Decidendi

Although De Marco received a lesser sentence despite a more serious role and larger quantity of cannabis, his sentence was lenient or manifestly inadequate. The applicant's effective sentence was appropriate to his own criminality, including multiple drug supply offences, his role as a principal distributor or franchisee in Gunnedah, his criminal history, and the Form 1 matter. Reducing the applicant's sentence to align it with De Marco's would compound error and would place the applicant out of parity with the broader group of co-offenders. No justifiable sense of grievance warranting intervention was established.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']