R v Todoroski [2010] NSWCCA 75

R v Todoroski [2010] NSWCCA 75

The Crown failed to demonstrate that the sentence for attempting to possess a marketable quantity of heroin was manifestly inadequate or that the sentencing discretion miscarried; no specific or latent error by the sentencing judge was found; sentencing represented a sound exercise of discretion in all the...

Source-derived case information.

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
30 April 2010
Procedural Posture
Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appeal Judgment
Outcome
Appeal dismissed
Legal Topics
['appeal Against Sentence' 'manifestly Inadequate Sentence' 'commonwealth Drug Offences' 'double Jeopardy in Sentencing' 'interaction of State and Commonwealth Law in Sentencing']
['criminal Law'] ['appeal Against Sentence' 'manifestly Inadequate Sentence' 'commonwealth Drug Offences' 'double Jeopardy in Sentencing' 'interaction of State and Commonwealth Law in Sentencing']

Source-derived case record

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

Crown Appeal Against Sentence / Appeal Judgment

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentence imposed for attempting to possess a marketable quantity of heroin was manifestly inadequate' 'Whether s 68A Crimes (Appeal and Review) Act 2001 (NSW) applies in federal criminal jurisdiction' 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in law or discretion']

Ratio Decidendi

The Crown failed to demonstrate that the sentence for attempting to possess a marketable quantity of heroin was manifestly inadequate or that the sentencing discretion miscarried; no specific or latent error by the sentencing judge was found; sentencing represented a sound exercise of discretion in all the circumstances.

Court Disposition

Appeal dismissed

Orders

  • ['Appeal dismissed']