Lee v R [2023] NSWCCA 70
The findings of objective seriousness by the sentencing judge in relation to both the intimidation and specially aggravated detain for advantage offences were open on the facts and not attended by error; the aggregate sentence was not manifestly excessive, being neither unreasonable nor plainly unjust.
Source-derived case information.
- Parties
- Applicant: Tristan James Lee; Respondent: Rex
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 27 March 2023
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Appeal Judgment
- Outcome
- Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- Appeal Against Sentence, Objective Seriousness, Manifestly Excessive Sentence, Aggregate Sentencing, Intimidation Offence, Specially Aggravated Detain for Advantage
Source-derived case record
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Parties
Tristan James Lee
Applicant
Rex
Respondent
Procedural Posture
Criminal Appeal / Leave to Appeal Against Sentence; Appeal Judgment
Legal Issues
- 1 Whether the findings of objective seriousness for both principal offences were open on the facts of this case
- 2 Whether the aggregate sentence imposed was manifestly excessive
Ratio Decidendi
The findings of objective seriousness by the sentencing judge in relation to both the intimidation and specially aggravated detain for advantage offences were open on the facts and not attended by error; the aggregate sentence was not manifestly excessive, being neither unreasonable nor plainly unjust.
Court Disposition
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Orders
- Leave to appeal is granted.
- Appeal dismissed.
Full Case Text
Judgment text and source record
Sign in to read
Sign in to read the full judgment text
Sign in to read the full judgment text. Downloads and additional research tools may depend on your plan.
Sign in to read the full judgment