Lissock v R [2019] NSWCCA 282

Lissock v R [2019] NSWCCA 282

The aggregate sentence was stern but not manifestly excessive given the serious penetrative child sexual offending, double lack of consent, physical injury, psychological harm, breach of trust and lack of remorse. However, by majority, the fresh medical evidence of terminal liver cancer was admitted and justified...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 November 2019
Procedural Posture
Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal From Sentence Imposed in the District Court of NSW on 11 December 2017
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence upheld; original aggregate sentence quashed; applicant re-sentenced to a lesser aggregate sentence.
Legal Topics
['child Sexual Assault Offences' 'manifest Excess' 'fresh Evidence on Sentence Appeal' 'terminal Illness and Imprisonment' 'aggregate Sentence' 'non Parole Period']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['child Sexual Assault Offences' 'manifest Excess' 'fresh Evidence on Sentence Appeal' 'terminal Illness and Imprisonment' 'aggregate Sentence' 'non Parole Period']

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 2 Amounts and remedies 1
Sign in to unlock

Procedural Posture

Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Appeal Against Sentence / Court of Criminal Appeal From Sentence Imposed in the District Court of NSW on 11 December 2017

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the aggregate sentence of 18 years imprisonment with a non-parole period of 12 years was manifestly excessive.' "Whether fresh medical evidence of the applicant's terminal liver cancer should be admitted and the applicant re-sentenced." "Whether the applicant's medical condition made imprisonment more onerous and justified a lesser aggregate sentence."]

Ratio Decidendi

The aggregate sentence was stern but not manifestly excessive given the serious penetrative child sexual offending, double lack of consent, physical injury, psychological harm, breach of trust and lack of remorse. However, by majority, the fresh medical evidence of terminal liver cancer was admitted and justified re-sentencing because the illness would make custody more difficult physically and psychologically and meant the applicant would never again enjoy healthy community life, while the objective gravity still required a substantial aggregate sentence. The appropriate re-sentence was a reduced aggregate head sentence of 14 years with a non-parole period of 9 years 4 months.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal against sentence upheld; original aggregate sentence quashed; applicant re-sentenced to a lesser aggregate sentence.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against sentence granted.' 'Appeal against sentence upheld.' 'The aggregate sentence imposed by Bright DCJ on 11 December 2017 is quashed.' 'In substitution, the applicant is sentenced to an aggregate head sentence of imprisonment for 14 years, with a non-parole period of 9 years 4 months, each to...