R v So [2004] NSWCCA 362

R v So [2004] NSWCCA 362

The sentencing judge did not err in structuring the sentence; all grounds of appeal failed as the sentences imposed were within discretion considering the seriousness and circumstances of the offence, and there was no error regarding the non parole period, the discount for guilty plea, the lack of special circumstances, or manifest excess.

Parties
Respondent: Regina; Applicant: Tony So
Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
25 October 2004
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Sentence, Determination on Appeal
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
Sentencing, Drug Offences, Appeals
Criminal Law Sentencing Drug Offences Appeals

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 6 Party arguments 2 Amounts and remedies 5
Sign in to unlock

Parties

Regina

Respondent

Tony So

Applicant

Procedural Posture

Criminal Appeal / Application for Leave to Appeal Sentence, Determination on Appeal

Legal Issues

  1. 1 Whether the relationship between the head sentence and the non parole period was erroneous
  2. 2 Whether the discount for pleas of guilty was inadequate
  3. 3 Whether the sentences were manifestly excessive

Ratio Decidendi

The sentencing judge did not err in structuring the sentence; all grounds of appeal failed as the sentences imposed were within discretion considering the seriousness and circumstances of the offence, and there was no error regarding the non parole period, the discount for guilty plea, the lack of special circumstances, or manifest excess.

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • Leave to appeal granted
  • Appeal dismissed