Stephen Leslie Newton v R [2009] NSWCCA 128

Stephen Leslie Newton v R [2009] NSWCCA 128

The brief misstatement of the maximum sentence by the sentencing judge had no material effect on the sentence imposed, and the disparity between the sentences for the applicant and his younger co-offender was justified by the marked difference in their ages and personal circumstances. There was no serious or unjustifiable disparity justifying appellate intervention.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
29 April 2009
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['sentencing' 'maximum Penalty Errors' 'parity Principle' 'disparity of Sentence' 'drug Offences']
['criminal Law'] ['sentencing' 'maximum Penalty Errors' 'parity Principle' 'disparity of Sentence' '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 / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by referring to the wrong maximum penalty for the offence' 'Whether there was a serious and unjustifiable disparity between sentences imposed on applicant and co-offender']

Ratio Decidendi

The brief misstatement of the maximum sentence by the sentencing judge had no material effect on the sentence imposed, and the disparity between the sentences for the applicant and his younger co-offender was justified by the marked difference in their ages and personal circumstances. There was no serious or unjustifiable disparity justifying appellate intervention.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted, appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal against sentence is granted' 'Appeal against sentence is dismissed']