R v Stephen Martin Andrews [2005] NSWCCA 199

R v Stephen Martin Andrews [2005] NSWCCA 199

The sentencing judge erred in treating the applicant's early personal history as entirely irrelevant and in failing to give proper weight to the applicant's contrition and assistance. These errors warranted appellate intervention, resulting in reduction of the sentence imposed for count 6.

Parties
Applicant: Stephen Martin Andrews; Crown: G Rowling
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
20 May 2005
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Re Sentencing
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted. Appeal allowed.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Aggravated Break, Enter and Steal, Subjective Factors in Sentencing
Criminal Law Sentencing Aggravated Break, Enter and Steal Subjective Factors in Sentencing

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 3 Authorities cited 8 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 10
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Stephen Martin Andrews

Applicant

G Rowling

Crown

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal and Re Sentencing

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge failed to give proper weight to subjective matters
  2. 2 Whether sufficient weight was given to contrition and assistance provided by the applicant
  3. 3 Appropriate sentencing for multiple aggravated break, enter and steal offences

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge erred in treating the applicant's early personal history as entirely irrelevant and in failing to give proper weight to the applicant's contrition and assistance. These errors warranted appellate intervention, resulting in reduction of the sentence imposed for count 6.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted. Appeal allowed.

Orders

  • Confirm the sentences imposed in respect of counts 1 – 5.
  • Quash the sentence imposed in respect of count 6.