Regina v Van-Oostveen [2001] NSWCCA 288
The sentencing judge erred in finding, beyond reasonable doubt, that the applicant purchased the heroin substantially for commercial purposes, thereby aggravating the seriousness of the offence. As this error vitiated the sentence, it was quashed and re-sentencing undertaken without this aggravating finding.
- Parties
- Respondent: Crown; Applicant: Stephanie Marie Van-Oostveen
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 02 August 2001
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- Appeal allowed; sentence quashed; applicant resentenced.
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Against Sentence, Supplying a Prohibited Drug, Manifestly Excessive Sentence, Findings of Fact, Plea of Guilty, Utilitarian Value, Contrition
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Crown
Respondent
Stephanie Marie Van-Oostveen
Applicant
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
- 2 Whether findings of fact made by the sentencing judge were open on the evidence
- 3 Appropriate value of plea of guilty and contrition
Ratio Decidendi
The sentencing judge erred in finding, beyond reasonable doubt, that the applicant purchased the heroin substantially for commercial purposes, thereby aggravating the seriousness of the offence. As this error vitiated the sentence, it was quashed and re-sentencing undertaken without this aggravating finding.
Court Disposition
Appeal allowed; sentence quashed; applicant resentenced.
Orders
- Application for leave to appeal granted
- Appeal allowed, sentence quashed
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment