Veith v R [2018] NSWCCA 284

Veith v R [2018] NSWCCA 284

Although the sentencing judge erred by approaching the sentencing task consistently with the overruled R v Clark substantial drug trafficking step, the applicant did not establish that the judge wrongly reduced the weight of good character merely because the offence was drug supply, and the sentence was not manifestly excessive. On re-exercising the sentencing discretion, no lesser sentence than 12 months imprisonment suspended on a s 12 good behaviour bond was warranted in law, so the appeal was dismissed under s 6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW).

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
07 December 2018
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Extension of time granted; leave to appeal against sentence allowed; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['supply of a Prohibited Drug' 'good Character in Sentencing' 'instinctive Synthesis' 'manifest Excess' 'suspended Sentence' 'extension of Time']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'drug Offences'] ['supply of a Prohibited Drug' 'good Character in Sentencing' 'instinctive Synthesis' 'manifest Excess' 'suspended Sentence' 'extension of Time']

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 Sentence Appeal / Application for Extension of Time and Leave to Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing judge erred by concluding that the applicant's subjective circumstances, including prior good character, were not unusual for people charged with supplying prohibited drugs and carried less weight." 'Whether the sentencing judge unduly constrained the sentencing exercise by considering whether the applicant had been involved in substantial drug trafficking rather than applying the instinctive synthesis approach.' 'Whether the sentence imposed was manifestly excessive.' 'Whether, after identified error, any lesser sentence was warranted in law.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sentencing judge erred by approaching the sentencing task consistently with the overruled R v Clark substantial drug trafficking step, the applicant did not establish that the judge wrongly reduced the weight of good character merely because the offence was drug supply, and the sentence was not manifestly excessive. On re-exercising the sentencing discretion, no lesser sentence than 12 months imprisonment suspended on a s 12 good behaviour bond was warranted in law, so the appeal was dismissed under s 6(3) of the Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW).

Court Disposition

Extension of time granted; leave to appeal against sentence allowed; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['The time within which to file a notice of appeal is extended to 6 March 2018.' 'Leave to appeal against sentence allowed.' 'Appeal dismissed.']