TA v R [2023] NSWCCA 27

TA v R [2023] NSWCCA 27

The sentencing Judge did not err. Reading the ex tempore sentencing remarks as a whole, the Judge substantively considered the applicant's deprived background, mental conditions, youth and impulsivity, and balanced those matters against the seriousness of the offending, community protection, specific deterrence and guarded rehabilitation prospects. The Judge correctly treated general deterrence as having a reduced but continuing role for this juvenile offender. The longer sentence imposed on the applicant than on her older co-offender was justified by the applicant's role as instigator and principal perpetrator of greater violence, robbery and threats, and did not create a justifiable...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
01 March 2023
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentencing Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['juvenile Sentencing' 'reduced Moral Culpability' 'childhood Deprivation' 'mental Disorders' 'general Deterrence' 'rehabilitation' 'parity Between Co Offenders' 'justifiable Sense of Grievance']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing'] ['juvenile Sentencing' 'reduced Moral Culpability' 'childhood Deprivation' 'mental Disorders' 'general Deterrence' 'rehabilitation' 'parity Between Co Offenders' 'justifiable Sense of Grievance']

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 Sentencing Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence in the Court of Criminal Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ["Whether the sentencing Judge erred by failing to make findings as to whether the applicant's childhood deprivation and mental disorders reduced her moral culpability." 'Whether the sentencing Judge erred in the approach taken to principles concerning the sentencing of a child.' 'Whether the disparity between the total effective sentences imposed on the applicant and her co-offender was such as to engender a justifiable sense of grievance.']

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing Judge did not err. Reading the ex tempore sentencing remarks as a whole, the Judge substantively considered the applicant's deprived background, mental conditions, youth and impulsivity, and balanced those matters against the seriousness of the offending, community protection, specific deterrence and guarded rehabilitation prospects. The Judge correctly treated general deterrence as having a reduced but continuing role for this juvenile offender. The longer sentence imposed on the applicant than on her older co-offender was justified by the applicant's role as instigator and principal perpetrator of greater violence, robbery and threats, and did not create a justifiable...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Grant leave to appeal.' 'Appeal dismissed.']