Bond v R [2023] NSWCCA 78

Bond v R [2023] NSWCCA 78

Leave to appeal was granted, but each ground failed. The evidence did not establish the kind of profound childhood deprivation required to engage Bugmy principles, and the applicant had not advanced that case at first instance. The evidence did not show that the applicant's cognitive deficiencies reduced his moral culpability or made custody more onerous, and the sentencing judge had taken the applicant's brain injuries into account by reducing the weight of general deterrence. The evidence about Covid-19 prison measures was incapable of establishing that the pandemic exacerbated the burden of the applicant's sentence.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 April 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Aggregate Sentence Imposed by the District Court of NSW Following Guilty Pleas
Outcome
Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['use of Intoxicating Substance to Commit an Indictable Offence' 'aggravated Sexual Assault' 'production and Possession of Child Abuse Material' 'bugmy Principles' 'cognitive Deficiency and Mental Health in Sentencing' 'covid 19 Prison Conditions']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['use of Intoxicating Substance to Commit an Indictable Offence' 'aggravated Sexual Assault' 'production and Possession of Child Abuse Material' 'bugmy Principles' 'cognitive Deficiency and Mental Health in Sentencing' 'covid 19 Prison Conditions']

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 Against Sentence / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Aggregate Sentence Imposed by the District Court of NSW Following Guilty Pleas

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge failed to apply the principles in Bugmy v The Queen concerning the applicant's alleged profoundly deprived childhood." "Whether the sentencing judge erred in taking into account the applicant's mental health and cognitive deficiencies, including moral culpability, deterrence and onerous custody." "Whether the sentencing judge failed to have regard to the impact of Covid-19 on the applicant's conditions of imprisonment."]

Ratio Decidendi

Leave to appeal was granted, but each ground failed. The evidence did not establish the kind of profound childhood deprivation required to engage Bugmy principles, and the applicant had not advanced that case at first instance. The evidence did not show that the applicant's cognitive deficiencies reduced his moral culpability or made custody more onerous, and the sentencing judge had taken the applicant's brain injuries into account by reducing the weight of general deterrence. The evidence about Covid-19 prison measures was incapable of establishing that the pandemic exacerbated the burden of the applicant's sentence.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal against sentence granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

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