R v GIANG [2005] NSWCCA 387

R v GIANG [2005] NSWCCA 387

The sentence imposed on the applicant was not manifestly excessive and was within the proper exercise of sentencing discretion; the parity principle did not require interference with the sentence as there were differences in remission, prospects of rehabilitation, and assessments of remorse compared to the co-offender.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
21 November 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Decision
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'parity' 'drug Offences']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'parity' 'drug Offences']

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 / Leave to Appeal and Appeal Decision

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence imposed on the applicant was manifestly excessive' 'Whether the principles of parity justify interference with the sentence imposed on the applicant']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentence imposed on the applicant was not manifestly excessive and was within the proper exercise of sentencing discretion; the parity principle did not require interference with the sentence as there were differences in remission, prospects of rehabilitation, and assessments of remorse compared to the co-offender.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

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