Park v R [2019] NSWCCA 105

Park v R [2019] NSWCCA 105

The original sentence imposed was manifestly excessive given the offender's relative youth, lack of criminal record, genuine remorse, and the circumstances of the offending. The appeal was allowed, the sentence quashed, and a lesser sentence was imposed.

Parties
Appellant: Tai Jin Park; Respondent: Crown
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
05 June 2019
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence
Outcome
Appeal allowed. Sentence quashed. Sentence substituted.
Legal Topics
Murder, Sentencing, Objective Seriousness, Premeditation, Manifest Excess
Criminal Law Murder Sentencing Objective Seriousness Premeditation Manifest Excess

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 12 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 8
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Tai Jin Park

Appellant

Crown

Respondent

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Appeal Against Sentence

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the sentencing judge erred in finding significant premeditation
  2. 2 Whether the objective seriousness was incorrectly assessed
  3. 3 Whether the sentence was manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The original sentence imposed was manifestly excessive given the offender's relative youth, lack of criminal record, genuine remorse, and the circumstances of the offending. The appeal was allowed, the sentence quashed, and a lesser sentence was imposed.

Court Disposition

Appeal allowed. Sentence quashed. Sentence substituted.

Orders

  • Grant leave to appeal.
  • Allow the appeal.