TT v R [2014] NSWCCA 206

TT v R [2014] NSWCCA 206

Although the sentencing judge misstated that manslaughter was probably the most serious indictable offence after murder, he correctly assessed the applicant's offending as towards the very top of the objective range under s 350. The applicant arranged for disposal of the young victim's body and maintained sustained, callous deception of the victim's family and police for more than two years, successfully diverting the investigation. The evidence of depressive illness did not require a different sentencing outcome, there was no established causal link or basis to reduce deterrence or find custody more onerous, and refusal to find special circumstances was open. Given the gravity of the...

Jurisdiction
Australia
Judgment Date
03 October 2014
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal; Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence for Accessory After the Fact to Manslaughter / Court of Criminal Appeal Application for Leave to Appeal From District Court Sentence; Leave Granted and Appeal Dismissed
Outcome
Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.
Legal Topics
['accessory After the Fact to Manslaughter' 'objective Seriousness' 'manifest Excess' 'mental Illness in Sentencing' 'special Circumstances' 'disposal of a Corpse' 'maximum Penalty']
['criminal Law' 'sentencing' 'criminal Appeals'] ['accessory After the Fact to Manslaughter' 'objective Seriousness' 'manifest Excess' 'mental Illness in Sentencing' 'special Circumstances' 'disposal of a Corpse' 'maximum Penalty']

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 Sentence Appeal; Application for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence for Accessory After the Fact to Manslaughter / Court of Criminal Appeal Application for Leave to Appeal From District Court Sentence; Leave Granted and Appeal Dismissed

Legal Issues

  1. 1 ['Whether the sentencing judge erred by overstating the objective seriousness of the offence.' "Whether the sentencing judge erred by understating the applicant's depressive illness." 'Whether the sentencing judge erred in declining to find special circumstances under s 44 of the Crimes (Sentencing Procedure) Act 1999 (NSW).' 'Whether the sentence of four years with a non-parole period of three years was manifestly excessive.']

Ratio Decidendi

Although the sentencing judge misstated that manslaughter was probably the most serious indictable offence after murder, he correctly assessed the applicant's offending as towards the very top of the objective range under s 350. The applicant arranged for disposal of the young victim's body and maintained sustained, callous deception of the victim's family and police for more than two years, successfully diverting the investigation. The evidence of depressive illness did not require a different sentencing outcome, there was no established causal link or basis to reduce deterrence or find custody more onerous, and refusal to find special circumstances was open. Given the gravity of the...

Court Disposition

Leave to appeal granted; appeal dismissed.

Orders

  • ['Leave to appeal granted.' 'Appeal dismissed.']