Moses v R [2015] NSWCCA 218

Moses v R [2015] NSWCCA 218

The Drug Court judge took into account the relevant matters required by s 12 of the Drug Court Act 1998 (NSW), including the Applicant's participation in the program, sanctions, custody, subjective material and the facts of the offences. The sentence was not excessive, particularly having regard to the Applicant's repeated break and enter offending and the aggravated circumstances of Count 9. Section 12(4) was not breached because no sentence for a particular offence was increased from the initial stage to the final stage. Section 58(1) did not assist the Applicant, and the Drug Court Act permitted an aggregate sentence for both summary and indictable offences. The backdating error had...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
19 August 2015
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal From the Drug Court of New South Wales / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Final Aggregate Sentence; Leave Granted and Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['drug Court Program Termination' 'final Sentence Under Drug Court Act 1998 (nsw)' 'aggregate Sentencing' 'summary and Indictable Offences' 'excessive Sentence' 'backdating Sentence Commencement']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['drug Court Program Termination' 'final Sentence Under Drug Court Act 1998 (nsw)' 'aggregate Sentencing' 'summary and Indictable Offences' 'excessive Sentence' 'backdating Sentence Commencement']

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 Sentence Appeal From the Drug Court of New South Wales / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Final Aggregate Sentence; Leave Granted and Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the aggregate sentence imposed by the Drug Court was excessive.' 'Whether the sentencing judge failed to consider relevant facts at final sentencing, including restitution, plea, familiarity with the premises, psychological material, references, the victim letter and Drug Court Program participation.' 'Whether s 12(4) of the Drug Court Act 1998 (NSW) was infringed by the final sentence.' 'Whether s 58(1) of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW) applied to prevent accumulation of sentences.' 'Whether there was any valid objection to an aggregate sentence for a combination of summary and indictable offences.' 'Whether there was an error in backdating the commencement of the sentence.']

Ratio Decidendi

The Drug Court judge took into account the relevant matters required by s 12 of the Drug Court Act 1998 (NSW), including the Applicant's participation in the program, sanctions, custody, subjective material and the facts of the offences. The sentence was not excessive, particularly having regard to the Applicant's repeated break and enter offending and the aggravated circumstances of Count 9. Section 12(4) was not breached because no sentence for a particular offence was increased from the initial stage to the final stage. Section 58(1) did not assist the Applicant, and the Drug Court Act permitted an aggregate sentence for both summary and indictable offences. The backdating error had...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal is granted.' 'The appeal is dismissed.']