Radi v R [2013] NSWCCA 278
Although a 'Muldrock error' was established, the substantial delay, lack of compelling explanation for delay, and consideration of all circumstances (including post-sentence events), did not warrant a lesser sentence in law. Therefore, it would be futile to grant an extension of time for leave to appeal against sentence.
- Jurisdiction
- Australia
- Judgment Date
- 14 November 2013
- Procedural Posture
- Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Extension of Time for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
- Outcome
- Application for extension of time dismissed.
- Legal Topics
- ['sentence Appeal' 'supplying a Commercial Quantity of a Prohibited Drug' 'standard Non Parole Period' 'delay in Appealing' 'principle of Finality']
Case Brief
Summary, issues, holding and outcome
More case intelligence is available
Unlock the full research layer for this judgment.
Procedural Posture
Criminal Sentence Appeal / Application for Extension of Time for Leave to Appeal Against Sentence
Legal Issues
- 1 ['Whether the decision in Muldrock v The Queen entitled applicant to an extension of time for leave to appeal against sentence' "Whether a 'Muldrock error' occurred in the sentencing process" 'Whether refusal of an extension of time would result in substantial injustice' 'Whether a lesser sentence was warranted in law under s6(3) Criminal Appeal Act 1912 (NSW)']
Ratio Decidendi
Although a 'Muldrock error' was established, the substantial delay, lack of compelling explanation for delay, and consideration of all circumstances (including post-sentence events), did not warrant a lesser sentence in law. Therefore, it would be futile to grant an extension of time for leave to appeal against sentence.
Court Disposition
Application for extension of time dismissed.
Orders
- ['Application for extension of time by the applicant 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